Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262166AbVCOAfX (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:35:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262170AbVCOAd5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:33:57 -0500 Received: from omx2-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.171.19]:19669 "EHLO omx2.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262166AbVCOAd2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:33:28 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:28:44 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com To: john stultz cc: Matt Mackall , lkml , Tim Schmielau , George Anzinger , albert@users.sourceforge.net, Ulrich Windl , Dominik Brodowski , David Mosberger , Andi Kleen , paulus@samba.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, keith maanthey , Patricia Gaughen , Chris McDermott , Max Asbock , mahuja@us.ibm.com, Nishanth Aravamudan , Darren Hart , "Darrick J. Wong" , Anton Blanchard , donf@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] new timeofday core subsystem (v. A3) In-Reply-To: <1110829401.30498.383.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <1110590655.30498.327.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> <20050313004902.GD3163@waste.org> <1110825765.30498.370.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> <20050314192918.GC32638@waste.org> <1110829401.30498.383.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1045 Lines: 23 On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, john stultz wrote: > Huh. So if I understand you properly, all timesources should have valid > read_fnct pointers that return the cycle value, however we'll still > preserve the type and mmio_ptr so fsyscall/vsyscall bits can use them > externally? > > Hmm. I'm a little cautious, as I really want to make the vsyscall > gettimeofday and regular do_gettimeofday be a similar as possible to > avoid some of the bugs we've seen between different gettimeofday > implementations. However I'm not completely against the idea. > > Christoph: Do you have any thoughts on this? Sorry to be late to the party. It would be a weird implementation to have two ways to obtain time for each timesource. Also would be even more a headache to maintain than the existing fastcall vs. fullcall. - 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/