From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Sep 30 20:27:19 2004
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6F34416A4CE; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:27:19 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id AA52843D45; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:27:18 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i8UKQqNP050356;
	Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:26:52 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 30 Sep 2004 21:40:21 +0200."
             <20040930214021.A84755@newtrinity.zeist.de> 
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:26:52 +0200
Message-ID: <50355.1096576012@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org
cc: Ken Smith <kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU>
cc: src-committers@freebsd.org
cc: Ken Smith <kensmith@freebsd.org>
cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sparc64/sparc64 machdep.c 
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:27:19 -0000

In message <20040930214021.A84755@newtrinity.zeist.de>, Marius Strobl writes:

>> Funny you should ask.  Testing the first version of this patch was how
>> we found the bug in counter.c - the machine I booted the test kernel
>> with happened to decide the counter-timer wasn't suitable either due
>> to the bug and it came up with no timecounters.  You should see what
>> happens to a machine that's not keeping time.  :-)

I know :-)

I wrote the code so you wouldn't be in doubt something was wrong.

>> We are drastically low on timecounter-capable devices on sparc64
>> though, it seems the counter-timer and the CPU are about all there
>> is.

We just need one good one, so as long as they have that we're fine.

I thought the 1usec counter were a sparc-architecture thing which
all machines had ?

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.