Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: TSC not updating after resume: Bug or Feature? | From | Dave Kleikamp <> | Date | Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:25:49 -0600 |
| |
On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 23:19 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, 18 of December 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > > Rafael, would something like this explain why we had to revert Shaggy's > > > patch? > > Well, I have yet to understand what the suspend-resume of the timekeeping code > actually does. > > The original description sounds worrisome to me, it looks like we've overlooked > something at least. > > > > His patch fixes the backward motion filter and I'm at an utter > > > loss why that would break suspend. > > > > yes, i'd love to have this commit reinstated: > > > > 5b7dba4: sched_clock: prevent scd->clock from moving backwards > > > > and the bug triggered by hibernation fixed instead. > > Shaggy said he had an idea of what was wrong, so I expect an updated version > of the patch to appear.
Not really. I said I'd look at it, but all I know is that it looks like something clock-related isn't initialized correctly after resume. I don't know enough to have any idea how to fix it.
> Thanks, > Rafael -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center
| |