![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Mikael Pettersson wrote: > Philippe Elie writes:> > From: Will Cohen <wcohen@redhat.com>> > > > Add oprofile support for Pentium Mobile (P6 core). Pentium Mobile needs > > to unmask LVPTC vector, since it doesn't hurt other P6 core based cpus > > we do it unconditionally for all these.> > [Patch talking about the Pentium-M.]> > I can find no support in Intel's documentation (IA32 Volume 3, > 25366813.pdf) that Pentium-M:s need to unmask LVTPC. > > How certain are you of this? Is this an undocumented hardware > quirk? If it is documented, please indicate where. I have tested it on a Pentium M machine. Without the unmask LVTPC the nmi handler collected precisely one interrupt. With the LVTPC unmask the OProfile data collection worked normally. > It's my theory that P4 added the auto-masking to help PEBS > buffer overflow situations, but since P-M doesn't have PEBS, > they shouldn't have had to change this on P-M as well. > OTOH, it's certainly possible they changed it by accident. My theory is that the Pentium M uses same bus interface and local apic as the Pentium M. Thus, the Pentium M shares the Pentium 4 need to unmask LVTPC. > One way of testing this would be to run a P-M with> nmi_watchdog=2. If the NMI counter keeps ticking, then > LVTPC does not need unmasking. Yes, I tested the nmi watchdog and it currently does not work on the Pentium M. It doesn't get the later interrupts and states it is stuck. -Will - 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/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:00 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||