Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754264Ab3EMPOK (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 May 2013 11:14:10 -0400 Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:10653 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751419Ab3EMPOI (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 May 2013 11:14:08 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,662,1363158000"; d="scan'208";a="46664083" Message-ID: <5191033E.2000303@codeaurora.org> Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 11:14:06 -0400 From: Christopher Covington User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120714 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Will Deacon CC: Marc Zyngier , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: Remove any correlation between IPC and BogoMips value References: <1367602547-19322-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> <5187EFF3.6010005@codeaurora.org> <20130507090849.GC25387@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <5189224A.70501@codeaurora.org> <20130508090644.GA15692@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> In-Reply-To: <20130508090644.GA15692@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1462 Lines: 36 Hi Will, On 05/08/2013 05:06 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > Hello Christopher, > > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 04:48:26PM +0100, Christopher Covington wrote: >> On 05/07/2013 05:08 AM, Will Deacon wrote: >>> That seems like a lot of effort in order to preserve something that isn't >>> even meaningful. We might be better just zeroing the value, but then we'll >>> inevitably get bug reports of it being `wrong'. >> >> If I were in to filing bug reports about bogomips values, I would be just as >> likely to do it for 1, 10000, 99999, and get_random_bytes(...) as for 0. > > That's a fair point, and one of the reasons I posted this as an RFC. I'd > basically like an `obviously bogus' value so that people don't think `hey, > my CPU sure it slow' and instead think `looks like this really is a bogus > value after all'. > > However, you're probably right that there isn't a number which can convey > that information properly, so how about we just put a string in there along > the lines of "not reported" and leave it at that? That sounds reasonable to me. Christopher -- Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by the Linux Foundation. -- 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/