![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 14:08:29 +0200 Matthias Urlichs <smurf@smurf.noris.de> wrote: > Hi, > > Andrew Morton: > > - CPU0 and CPU1 share a TSC and CPU2 and CPU3 share another TSC. > > > That mmakes sense, since they're one dual-core Xeon each. OK. > > - Earlier kernels didn't use the TSC as a time source whereas this one > > does, hence the problems which you're observing. > > > Correct; see below. > > > I assume that booting with clock=pit or clock=pmtmr fixes it? > > > Testing... yes, both. > > > It would be useful to check your 2.6.17 boot logs, see if we can work out > > what 2.6.17 was using for a clock source. > > > That's easy: > > 2.6.17 -Using pmtmr for high-res timesource > 2.6.18git +Time: tsc clocksource has been installed. > > I missed those two lines, as in the boot logs they're not really > adjacent, so they got lost in the jumble of other differences. OK, thanks. Marking the TSC as bad in this case is simple to do - let us let John work out the best way. We must have lost a TSC sanity check somewhere along the way. I wonder what it was? > Interestingly, CPU0/1 gets 6000 bogomips while CPU2/3 only reaches 5600 ..? > (That happens with both kernels.) I do wonder why, and whether this has any > bearing on the current problem. I wouldn't expect it to matter, unless the TSCs are running at different speeds or something. Also the sched-domain migration costs are grossly different between the two kernels. Maybe we changed the migration-cost-estimation code; I forget. I'll see if we can get an expert opinion on the write_tsc() failure. - 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: 2006-07-23 14:45 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||