On Wednesday 26 May 2010 18:22:33 Chris Metcalf wrote:
quoted text
> On 5/25/2010 4:12 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > +unsigned long long sched_clock(void)
> > +{
> > +     u64 cycles;
> > +     u32 cyc_hi, cyc_lo;
> > +
> > +     if (unlikely(cyc2ns_mult == 0))
> > +             setup_clock();
> >
> >   Please initialize stuff before it is called the first time and not
> >   at some arbitrary point conditionally in a hotpath.
> >   
> 
> Looking more closely at this, the reason for this lazy initialization
> was that sched_clock() can be called from lockdep_init(), which runs way
> before any tasteful architecture-specific initialization can happen. 
> Perhaps the correct model is that during the early stages of boot, we
> are happy to shift by zero, multiply by zero, and claim the time is zero :-)

Yes, that is what other architectures do. The time remains zero during
early boot. setup_arch is probably a good place to start the clock.

	Arnd
--
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/