From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 18 11: 1:37 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BAAC37BA4C for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 11:01:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost.freebsd.dk [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA17285; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 20:01:09 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Mitsuru IWASAKI Cc: abc@firehouse.net, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patch to allow TSC with APM In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 19 Apr 2000 02:47:41 +0900." <200004181747.CAA24371@tasogare.imasy.or.jp> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 20:01:09 +0200 Message-ID: <17283.956080869@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <200004181747.CAA24371@tasogare.imasy.or.jp>, Mitsuru IWASAKI writes : >Hi, > >> I'd like to recommend the following patches. Adding the option >> "CLK_USE_TSC_ANYWAY" allows my laptop to use the TSC even though it >> is "flakey". This option should not be set by default. > >I saw the same kind of patches and my laptop has this w/o any problems >for long time. >I'd like to commit submitted patch 2 or 3 days later if no objections. It would be nice to have some kind of understanding why the tsc is better than the i8254 before we kludge it... -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD coreteam member | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message