[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] Updated dynamic tick patches - Fix lost tick calculation in timer_pm.c
    Lee Revell wrote:
    > On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 22:42 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
    >>With this patch, time had kept up really well on one particular
    >>machine (Intel 4way Pentium 3 box) overnight, while
    >>on another newer machine (Intel 4way Xeon with HT) it didnt do so
    >>well (time sped up after 3 or 4 hours). Hence I consider this
    >>particular patch will need more review/work.
    > Are lost ticks really that common? If so, any idea what's disabling
    > interrupts for so long (or if it's a hardware issue)? And if not, it
    > seems like you'd need an artificial way to simulate lost ticks in order
    > to test this stuff.

    In my experience, turning off DMA for IDE disks is a pretty good way to
    generate lost ticks :-)

    Peter Williams

    "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
    -- Ambrose Bierce
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-09-03 06:21    [W:0.021 / U:14.144 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site