Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:00:14 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: George Anzinger <george@mvista.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] to fix xtime lock for in the RT kernel patch
Message-ID: <20050121090014.GA30379@elte.hu>
References: <41F04573.7070508@mvista.com> <20050121063519.GA19954@elte.hu> <41F0BA56.9000605@mvista.com> <20050121082125.GA28267@elte.hu> <41F0BFA4.5030107@mvista.com> <20050121084557.GA29550@elte.hu> <41F0C33D.60908@mvista.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <41F0C33D.60908@mvista.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 938
Lines: 21


* George Anzinger <george@mvista.com> wrote:

> What I am suggesting is spliting the mark code so that it would only
> grap the offset (current TSC in most systems) during interrupt
> processing.  Applying this would be done later in the thread.  Since
> it is not applying the offset, the xtime_lock would not need to be
> taken.

ok, you are right, and this would be fine with me. Wanna take a shot at
it? I've uploaded the -03 patch which is my most current tree. (with the
do_timer() moving done already.) I've reviewed the TSC offset codepath
again and i'm not sure where i got the 10 usecs from ... it's a pretty
cheap codepath that can be done in the direct interrupt just fine.

	Ingo
-
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/