Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 19 Sep 2006 01:08:49 +0400 | From | "Vladimir B. Savkin" <> | Subject | Re: Network performance degradation from 2.6.11.12 to 2.6.16.20 |
| |
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 01:27:57PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > The codebase for timing (and lots of other things) is quite different > between 32bit and 64bit. You're really surprised it doesn't work if you do such things? > It works, and after your remark above, I'm surprised. Dunno about slow TSC drift though, there was not enough time passed to detect it, and I hope we will have this problem soved in a better way before the drift becomes visible :)
> > But the question is, why stock 2.6.18-rc7 could not use TSC on its own? > > x86-64 doesn't use the TSC when it deems it to not be reliable, which > is the case on your system. > Could it at least print something so that I know that using TSC was considered, but rejected?
> > What hardware exactly. Doesn't it affect only CPU? And they are not > > know to fail before any other components. > > All hardware. It's basic physics.
Hm, what other hardware is affected by idle=poll? Does this option ear out HDDs? ~ :wq With best regards, Vladimir Savkin.
- 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/
| |