Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266243AbUFPLX1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2004 07:23:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266244AbUFPLX1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2004 07:23:27 -0400 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:6795 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266243AbUFPLXZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2004 07:23:25 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:19:12 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: johnstul@us.ibm.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux@brodo.de Subject: lost timer check in 2.6.7 Message-Id: <20040616131912.14b73b39.ak@suse.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.11 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 691 Lines: 22 2.6.7 has + /* ... but give the TSC a fair chance */ + if (lost_count > 25) + cpufreq_delayed_get(); While looking at porting this code to x86-64 I noticed that this only runs for the first lost timer event. In case of dynamic frequency which varies shouldn't this be more like if ((lost_count % 25) == 0) cpufreq_delayed_get(); ? Otherwise this heuristic will only work once. -Andi - 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/