OK, right. The precision is still very good anyway.
> You haven't changed the calibrate_tsc routine. Does it mean it works
> for you?
Yep. For the record it reports a 267280004 Hz processor for a K6-266
The printk quotients are micro=16069168, nano=1004323704, both consistent.
>So maybe my CPU (100MHz Pentium) is too slow. As indicated
> in the comment I had thought it should do from 64 MHz on (thus
> including a Pentium 75). I don't have the code here now, but have I
> missed something obvious (like the direction of the shift)?
The overflow was probably not in the calibration at all, but in
time_init() just after the calibration, where cpu_hz was calculated.
With the 4 shifts in the wrong direction it gives a factor of 256 too
high. So 256*100*10^8 is much larger than 2^32.
Not so obvious though, since the difference is that the shifts are to
make a change in the representation instead of a change in units.
-- Robert
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/