* Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 09:31:22PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> > On 4/10/2013 8:31 p.m., tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >Commit-ID: d8b11a0cbd1c66ce283eb9dabe0498dfa6483f32
> > >Gitweb:
> > >http://git.kernel.org/tip/d8b11a0cbd1c66ce283eb9dabe0498dfa6483f32
> > >Author: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
> > >AuthorDate: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 16:00:14 +0200
> > >Committer: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org>
> > >CommitDate: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 09:58:55 +0200
> > >
> > >perf/x86: Clean up cap_user_time* setting
> > >
> > >Currently the cap_user_time_zero capability has different tests than
> > >cap_user_time; even though they expose the exact same data.
> > >
> > >Switch from CONSTANT && NONSTOP to sched_clock_stable to also deal
> > >with multi cabinet machines and drop the tsc_disabled() check.. non of
> > >this will work sanely without tsc anyway.
> >
> > Unfortunately in the case that TSC is disabled, sched_clock is still
> > reported as stable, which means removing the tsc_disabled() check breaks
> > the capability bit. e.g.
>
> I'm wanting to hear from the x86 people on why we have this absurd knob
> to begin with; but I'm tempted to simply disable all of perf if you
> touch it.
I'm fully with you, please zap the 'notsc' boot option - it's an ancient
relic, if any box is still broken with the TSC on we want to hear about it
and fix it!
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
