lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: upstream regression (IO-APIC?)
    From
    Date
    On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 09:28 -0800, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > On Sunday 02 November 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > > On Sunday 02 November 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > > > On Thursday 30 October 2008, Robert Hancock wrote:
    > > > > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > > > > > The current Linus tree as of commit e946217e4fdaa67681bbabfa8e6b18641921f750
    > > > > > is broken for me. I get either the following panic (see log from qemu below)
    > > > > > or lost IRQs on ATA init... Is this a known issue?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > PS The tree that I used before and was supposedly good (sorry, I'm too tired
    > > > > > to verify it now) had commit 57f8f7b60db6f1ed2c6918ab9230c4623a9dbe37 at head.
    > > >
    > > > Unfortunately 57f8f7b60db6f1ed2c6918ab9230c4623a9dbe37 (v2.6.28-rc1)
    > > > is also bad. Bisecting it further was a real pain (i.e. I hit broken
    > > > build with x86 irqbalance changes, broken build with netfilter nat
    > > > changes and jbd journal problem). In the end it turned out that 2.6.27
    > > > is bad too! However with 2.6.27 the panic occurs only once per several
    > > > attempts and if there is no panic kernel boots normally (no lost IRQs).
    > > >
    > > > [...]
    > > >
    > > > I finally managed to narrow it down to change making x86 use tsc_khz
    > > > for loops_per_jiffy -- commit 3da757daf86e498872855f0b5e101f763ba79499
    > > > ("x86: use cpu_khz for loops_per_jiffy calculation"). This approach
    > > > seems too simplistic (as I see now Arjan & Pavel expressed concerns
    > > > about it back when the patch was posted initially [1][2]). Also it
    > > > would probably be preferred to re-use existing preset_lpj variable
    > > > (just like KVM does it for similar purpose [3]) instead of adding a
    > > > lpj_tsc one and increasing complexity.
    > >
    > > It turned out that I can boot a kernel with different config with
    > > HZ == 250 just fine and switching to HZ == 1000 makes it fail.
    > >
    > >
    > > Looking into it some more:
    > >
    > > HZ == 250 kernel (good):
    > >
    > > Calibrating delay loop (skipped), value calculated using timer frequency.. 2986.79 BogoMIPS (lpj=5973580)
    > >
    > > HZ == 1000 kernel (bad):
    > >
    > > Calibrating delay loop (skipped), using tsc calculated value.. 2990.35 BogoMIPS (lpj=1495176)
    > >
    > > HZ == 1000 kernel with hackyfix (good):
    > >
    > > Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 3016.68 BogoMIPS (lpj=6033376)
    > >
    > >
    > > Argggh... lpj is used for udelay() & friends so this bug is quite
    > > dangerous (since udelay() & friends are used for hardware delays)...
    >
    > It may be not as severe as I initially thought,
    > (obviously) the real hardware works fine:
    >
    > calibrate_delay_direct(): lpj=1495884
    > Calibrating delay loop (skipped), value calculated using timer frequency.. 2990.36 BogoMIPS (lpj=1495183)
    >
    > So the issue only affects qemu ATM.
    Oh so its on a emulator, something wrong in the timer emulation logic in
    qemu ?


    >
    > Thanks,
    > Bart



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-11-03 19:07    [W:0.026 / U:33.744 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site