https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848788 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848788#c Andreas Schwab changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|schwab@suse.com |jengelh@inai.de -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848788 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848788#c4 Andreas Jaeger changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|aj@suse.com |jengelh@inai.de --- Comment #4 from Andreas Jaeger 2014-06-23 09:17:36 UTC --- I don't have Michal's current email, so feel free to remove the hack -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848788 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=848788#c6 Michal Hrusecky changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |michal.hrusecky@opensuse.or | |g --- Comment #6 from Michal Hrusecky 2014-06-23 13:48:16 UTC --- I wrote into changes: - Don't require too many timing calibration data on x86 And from what I remember this part of code was just measuring how long does it take to compute something, doing it multiple times, computing average and using it for some optimalization. As some itearations went through and doing this kind of optimalization in binary distribution is bogus anyway, I just copied last successfull read over and over to fill in the array they use and didn't investigated details about the failure itself. That's why it is named hack :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.