Re: [PATCH] x86: use explicit timing delay for pit accesses in kerneland pcspkr driver

[Rene Herman]

On 18-02-08 22:04, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 18-02-08 21:43, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> > Rene Herman wrote:
> > > Now with respect to the original pre port 80 "jmp $+2" I/O delay 
> > > (which the Pentium obsoleted) I suppose it'll probably be okay even 
> > > without fixing that specifically but do note such -- it's a vital 
> > > part of the problem.
> >
> > Sorry, that paragraph didn't parse for me.
>
> I mean that before the linux kernel used a port 0x80 write as an I/O 
> delay it used a short jump (two in a row actually...) as such and this 
> was at the time that it actually ran on the old legacy stuff that is of 
> most concern here.
>
> No, if I'm not mistaken, those two jumps are actually what the udelay() 

_Now_, if I'm ...

> is going to do anyway as part of delay_loop() at that early stage so 
> that even before loops_per_jiffy calibration, I believe we should still 
> be okay.
>
> Yes, it's a bit of a "well, hrrm" thing, but, well... loops_per_jiffy 
> can be initialised a bit more conservatively then today as well (and as 
> discussed earlier, possibly per CPU family) but I believe it's actually 
> sort of fine not too worry much about it...

Rene.
--
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/