Re: [PATCH 00/10][RFC] Increased clocksource validation and cleanups

2015-01-12 Thread Richard Cochran
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 10:22:11AM -0800, John Stultz wrote: > Yea, I've not looked at the actual performance impact yet, but things > like the read-time capping (which is in the hot path) could be put > under a debug config. Thanks for the suggestion! Having a broken clock is like having a broken

Re: [PATCH 00/10][RFC] Increased clocksource validation and cleanups

2015-01-12 Thread John Stultz
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 3:41 AM, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 04:34:18PM -0800, John Stultz wrote: >> So this series is the result of earlier discussions with Linus >> and his suggestions around improvements to clocksource validation >> in the hope we can more easily catch bad

Re: [PATCH 00/10][RFC] Increased clocksource validation and cleanups

2015-01-11 Thread Richard Cochran
On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 04:34:18PM -0800, John Stultz wrote: > So this series is the result of earlier discussions with Linus > and his suggestions around improvements to clocksource validation > in the hope we can more easily catch bad hardware. Why penalize most users just because of a random ha