Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 May 2001 11:52:18 -0600 (MDT) | From | Jim Castleberry <> | Subject | Re: "clock timer configuration lost" on Serverworks chipset |
| |
I'm confused. The 2.2.19 time.c is already doing ">": /* VIA686a test code... reset the latch if count > max */ if (count > LATCH-1) { [adjust count and whine] The 2.2.20-pre2 patch doesn't change time.c, and I don't see this code in 2.4.4 or 2.4.5pre.
Are you saying the code should be doing the equivalent of "(count > LATCH)", or is 2.2.19 correct and the whines I'm seeing mean there really is a problem with the Serverworks chipset?
Thanks,
jcastle
Alan Cox wrote: >Jim Castleberry)wrote: >> How well has the problem been nailed down? Could it be that it just >> showed up first on VIA and the real cause (and fix) remains to be >> discovered? Or does Serverworks somehow have an identical bug in >> their chipset? > >There is a notional off by one in the check at least by the rules of the >original chip which do allow the overflow value to be visible momentarily. >Later -ac checks for > not >= >
- 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/
| |