Re: [patch] input: Fix CLOCK_TICK_RATE usage ... [8/13]

From: george anzinger (
Date: Tue Jun 17 2003 - 19:46:09 EST

Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 11:21:13PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
>>On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 11:11:46PM +0100, Riley Williams wrote:
>>>On most architectures, the said timer runs at 1,193,181.818181818 Hz.
>>Wow. That's more accurate than a highly expensive Caesium standard.
>>And there's one inside most architectures? Wow, we're got a great
>>deal there, haven't we? 8)
> Well, it's unfortunately up to 400ppm off on most systems. Nevertheless
> this is the 'official' frequency, actually it's a NTSC dotclock (14.3181818)
> divided by 12.
>>> > Please do not add CLOCK_TICK_RATE to the ia64 timex.h header file.
>>>It needs to be declared there. The only question is regarding the
>>>value it is defined to, and it would have to be somebody with better
>>>knowledge of the ia64 than me who decides that. All I can do is to
>>>post a reasonable default until such decision is made.
>>If this is the case, we have a dilema on ARM. CLOCK_TICK_RATE has
>>been, and currently remains (at Georges distaste) a variable on
>>some platforms. I shudder to think what this is doing to some of
>>the maths in Georges new time keeping and timer code.

So do I :)

George Anzinger
Preemption patch:

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to More majordomo info at Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 23 2003 - 22:00:23 EST