Subject: Re: [RFC][patch 00/12] clocksource / timekeeping rework V2
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@fifo99.com>
To: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090730125351.6f16e9ec@skybase>
References: <200907291717.n6THHG6f001426@d06av06.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
	 <20090730125351.6f16e9ec@skybase>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 05:49:33 -0700
Message-Id: <1248958173.6046.32.camel@desktop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 971
Lines: 21

On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 12:53 +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:

> > I'm not sure allowing that type of override a good idea tho .. I don't
> > think it's considered a usable clock when the rating goes to zero.
> 
> Override as the root user -> your foot, no? The whole override stuff is
> there for the case that the clocksource selection picked a broken clock
> and you want to force the system into a semi-working state. Ideally the
> whole override would go away, but that is probably wishful thinking..

I would agree if the system doesn't crash as a result, if it just starts
to operate funny then that's maybe acceptable. If you keep the change
rating function, you could potentially remove the unregister path..

Daniel

--
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/