Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:21:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:21:30 -0500 Received: from e3.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.103]:54271 "EHLO e3.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:21:28 -0500 Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [PATCH] linux-2.5.54_delay-cleanup_A0 From: john stultz To: Pavel Machek Cc: lkml In-Reply-To: <20030118135408.GA22669@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <200301180325.h0I3PGa07081@eng2.beaverton.ibm.com> <1042860792.32477.36.camel@w-jstultz2.beaverton.ibm.com> <20030118135408.GA22669@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1043090602.32478.54.camel@w-jstultz2.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.1 Date: 20 Jan 2003 11:23:22 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2003-01-18 at 05:54, Pavel Machek wrote: > Well, loop_delay() was big (fatal!) problem -- it can actaully wait > for *less* time than told to. That happens if notebook boots during > "battery low" and than goes to AC power. Thinkpad 560X is example of > such behaviour. Slow (but working!) PIT seems to be only option on > such machine. I need to look more at the cpu_freq code, but I suspect it could it help solve or lessen the problem (if we can detect the event on those older systems). Regardless, you make a good point, so if I get the time I'll look into a real PIT based delay. Thanks for the feeback. -john - 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/