On Tue, 25 May 2010, Brian Bloniarz wrote:

quoted text
> john stultz wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 20:16 -0400, Brian Bloniarz wrote:
> >> On 05/24/2010 09:33 PM, Brian Bloniarz wrote:
> >>> So what's wrong with just adding a
> >>> /sys/devices/system/clocksource/clocksource0/tsc_khz?
> >> As an RFC:
> >>
> >> Add clocksource.sys_register & sys_unregister so the
> >> current clocksource can add supplemental information to
> >> /sys/devices/system/clocksource/clocksource0/
> >>
> >> Export tsc_khz when current_clocksource==tsc so that
> >> daemons like NTP can account for the variability of
> >> calibration results.
> > 
> > I think this is a bad idea, as it creates an ABI that is arch AND
> > machine specific, which will cause portability problems in applications
> > that expect the interface to be there.
> 
> It's an arch-independent ABI that returns ENOENT on
> unsupported platforms ;)
> 
> Could you please explain what you envision as an
> arch-independent solution to this problem?
> I guess the tsc_long_calibration=1 alternative is
> one.

Arch independent solution is to provide information about the current
clock source in general. This is _NOT_ a TSC specific problem, you
have the same trouble with any other clocksource which gets calibrated
and does not take it's frequency as a constant value from boot loader,
configuration or some CPU/chipset register. The only missing piece is
a frequency member in struct clocksource which needs to be filled in
by the arch/machine specific code.

Thanks,

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