Re: cpu_clock confusion
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: 2008-04-24 09:28:18
Also in:
lkml
Attachments
- signature.asc [application/pgp-signature] 828 bytes
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: 2008-04-24 09:28:18
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 02:24 -0700, David Miller wrote:
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:21:52 +0200quoted
Hmm. Why is that whole cpu_clock stuff in place anyway? powerpc has perfectly synchronised time across processors with dirt cheap access to it as well, so why build all this code that only messes it up on top of it?Same on sparc64. These changes add more bugs than they fix.
I tend to think all this clock business should be done local to those arches that aren't capable of providing cheap, useful synchronised and accurate clocks themselves. Or be a lib that they can link in if needed. As it stands, it seems to me that it all just penalises those architectures that have decent clocks. johannes