On Jan 25, 2008 5:58 PM, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > sure, done.
Thanks. > what method are you using of determining quality? I was talking about code quality: adding a dependency on jiffies does not seems like a good idea. But also, about the clock quality, I was focusing on getting rid of underflows and overflows so relaxed the checks. But I realized all these underflows are definitely needed. I mean, the conversion from TSC to sched_clock always rounds to lower, so overtime it lags a bit. > Could you perhaps try > to automate it? (even better would be some self-test within the kernel > that detects badness) I find the overflow/underflow/warps checks you added in the first place to be sufficent. Not sure we want to add more tests to differentiate between normal and abnormal drifts. Thanks for your prompt reply. -- Guillaume -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
