From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 9 18:01:59 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C2AD1065675; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 18:01:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from serenity@exscape.org) Received: from ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net (ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net [80.76.149.212]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB6818FC12; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 18:01:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from serenity@exscape.org) Received: from c83-253-252-234.bredband.comhem.se ([83.253.252.234]:40291 helo=mx.exscape.org) by ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MOxvQ-0004mW-6E; Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:00:54 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.5] (macbookpro [192.168.1.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.exscape.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F051AF9A6F; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 20:00:51 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: From: Thomas Backman To: Andriy Gapon In-Reply-To: <4A562960.3010801@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 20:00:49 +0200 References: <4A562960.3010801@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-Originating-IP: 83.253.252.234 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1MOxvQ-0004mW-6E. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net 1MOxvQ-0004mW-6E be2621d07d7beec1ece6b6451ce85bbe Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dtrace users opinion solicited (timestamps) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:01:59 -0000 On Jul 9, 2009, at 19:31, Andriy Gapon wrote: > There are at least the following two alternatives: > > 1. Keep things as they are and warn users not to change CPU clock > frequency when > they use DTrace and the CPU doesn't have invariant TSC. I think that > this should > cause only minor inconveniences to a portion of DTrace users. Hmm, but "things as they are" causes an overflow about every 10 seconds, so the value is quite useless now (which, of course, you know about, having written a patch for it :) Is scenario #1 after the patch (PR kern/127441 for the rest of you) or not? Regards, Thomas