Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 9 Nov 2002 12:45:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 9 Nov 2002 12:45:51 -0500 Received: from host194.steeleye.com ([66.206.164.34]:55056 "EHLO pogo.mtv1.steeleye.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 9 Nov 2002 12:45:50 -0500 Message-Id: <200211091752.gA9HqR802867@localhost.localdomain> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: "Martin J. Bligh" cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com Subject: Re: [PATCH][2.5] notsc option needs some attention/TLC Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 12:52:27 -0500 From: "J.E.J. Bottomley" X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.1 (http://amavis.org/) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1806 Lines: 47 > having this config option ass-backwards is mind-bogglingly confusing, > and there seems no real reason for it. John had a plan to just put in > CONFIG_X86_PIT instead as the inverse of this, and delete > CONFIG_X86_TSC. He seems to have gone off this idea for some reason I > can't understand ... I think it solves a lot of these issues ... Actually, this is partly my fault. When the subarch code went in, the meaning of CONFIG_X86_TSC got altered to mean, 'If not y, don't use tsc at all' (so I could disable the TSC entirely for Voyager). Then, when code moved to kernel/timers we got some code with the old meaning and some with the new, hence the confusion. The CONFIG_X86_PIT was something I added to try to clarify. There are three cases with this: PIT y, TSC n: Never use TSC, always use PIT PIT y, TSC y: Try TSC at first, if it doesn't work, fall back to PIT PIT n, TSC y: TSC always works, use it without testing. Obviously PIT n, TSC n is bogus. There are also two distinct usages of TSC: 1. do_fast_gettimeofday (now in timers) which *requires* the TSCs to be synchronised across all CPUs 2. more accurate udelay (which already has the mechanisms in place to cope with TSCs running at different rates). 1. is usually the reason why numa like machines want to disable the TSC entirely. Linus isn't very happy with the global TSC disable patch (see http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=103652952900006&r=1&w=2). And wants a better solution. (Then, of course, there are the additional timer options, like the cyclone). James - 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/