On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:57:12 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > hm, that too is due to the tsc.c unification - Alok Cc:-ed. > > > Applied your fix to x86/urgent. > > > > ACKed-by: Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Good catch Peter. I'm puzzled how that bug was latent on 64bit for > > so long with no-one realising though. > > i think it's the combination of these two factors: > > - bootup frequently is typically full-speed, so we calibrate things > right > > - cpufreq events are relatively slow-scale - and when they trigger > the system is definitely not under load. So how precisely the > scheduler functions isnt all that important in such scenarios - > there's tons of CPU power available. > - many many of the 64 bit capable cpus are constant-tsc anyway -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
