Re: [RFC][PATCH] 2.6.0-test11 sched_clock() broken for "drifty ITC"

[Nick Piggin]

Andrew Morton wrote:

> Nick Piggin <piggin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> >
> > > So i believe the generic relaxing of sched_clock() synchronization is
> > > the right thing to do. I like your patch. It adds minimal overhead and
> > > solves a hard problem - nice work! Andrew, please apply it.
> > Its a great looking patch if you must have high res sched_clock. So
> > I guess I agree with it.
>
> miaow ;)

I'm just thinking that computers with unsynched clocks have less
need for good interactivity, but thats probably too narrow and x86
a view anyway.

> > Can we have a scheduler day when Andrew is ready to take patches for
> > it? I have a few small changes that I'd like to get merged soon too
> > (not sched domains - that should probably go to the mm tree for a while)
> >
> > Relevant patches are
> > sched-ctx-count-preempt.patch
> > sched-fork-cleanup.patch
> > sched-migrate-comment.patch
> > sched-style.patch
> > sched-migrate-affinity-race.patch
>
> Post 'em.

OK, I'll trim the cc list though...


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/