[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Regression in 2.6.27 caused by commit bfc0f59

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Larry Finger wrote:
> TSC calibrated against PIT
> Detected 428.823 MHz processor.

Ok, Thomas, that means that the PIT is reliable (not surprising), and the
PM_TIMER isn't (again, I'm not horribly surprised). And HPET isn't
available, of course.

The old x86-32 code never even bothered with the PM_TIMER for calibration.
I don't understand why the x86-64 code bothers with it either. Why not
just drop that whole broken thing, and just depend on the PIT if there is
no HPET?

I would also like to point out that the 32-bit code actually had a much
nicer PIT setup, using the much better documented mach_prepare_counter()
and mach_countup() helper functions. I'm unhappy to note that the new
"common" code uses what appears to be the inferior code.

Also, note that this is _not_ a new issue. See "verify_pmtmr_rate()" in
drivers/clocksource/acpi_pm.c, along with all the code to check that the
reads are stable in "init_acpi_pm_clocksource()".

IOW, the PM_TIMER has been found to be broken before. Depending on it for
calibration is broken.


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-01 20:45    [W:0.089 / U:1.748 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site