Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: + clocksource-increase-initcall-priority.patch added to -mm tree | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Date | Sun, 08 Oct 2006 23:38:25 +0200 |
| |
On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 14:31 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 23:20 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-10-08 at 14:15 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > > > > > Which one exactly? I'm not aware of a problem with the existing code at > > > > all. > > > > > > Clock shuffling. > > > > What's the problem with that ? It replaces clocks. Where _is_ the > > problem ? > > The problem is that it's not optimal to have clocks switching furiously. > This is something John notes as an issue in the unchanged > kernel/time/clocksource.c file.
I don't see that behaviour on my machines and nobody complains about that. I don't care about stale comments. Point me to a bug report instead of your perception of what's optimal and not.
Working is not necessary optimal, but your vision of optimal is not necessarily working either.
tglx
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |