From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753232Ab0KEV16 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Nov 2010 17:27:58 -0400 Received: from smtp-out-084.synserver.de ([212.40.180.84]:1053 "HELO smtp-out-086.synserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752300Ab0KEV14 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Nov 2010 17:27:56 -0400 X-SynServer-TrustedSrc: 1 X-SynServer-AuthUser: markus@trippelsdorf.de X-SynServer-PPID: 21998 Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 22:27:49 +0100 From: Markus Trippelsdorf To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov , john stultz , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "hpa@linux.intel.com" , Ingo Molnar , "Herrmann3, Andreas" , "heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com" , "a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl" , "avi@redhat.com" , "mtosatti@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [bisected] Clocksource tsc unstable git Message-ID: <20101105212749.GA1559@arch.trippelsdorf.de> References: <20101029083013.GA1553@arch.trippelsdorf.de> <20101029102713.GA21125@aftab> <20101029170040.GJ21125@aftab> <20101029172631.GA23546@arch.trippelsdorf.de> <20101101184512.GA1589@arch.trippelsdorf.de> <20101105160919.GC25704@aftab> <20101105164225.GA1594@arch.trippelsdorf.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101105164225.GA1594@arch.trippelsdorf.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 05:42:25PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 05:09:19PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 11:26:54AM -0400, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > Ok, I'm waiting for Boris to get us the confirmation from HW folks. > > > > However, we don't know (yet) whether this can be used in the > > non-periodic mode too. My gut feeling says yes but I wouldn't trust it. > > > > We went and collected that value a bunch of systems and it looks like it > > would need more massaging (read: capping) since some BIOSen simply write > > crap in it. It ranges from > > > > - 0x37ee on old nVidia and Intel boards (this is definitely crap, I > > can't imagine a minimum ticks value of 14318 for a HPET but who knows) > > > > - 0x1000 on a HP machine (also fishy) > > > > - 0x10, 0x14 on current SBxxx boards > > > > - 0x80 on newer Intel boards > > "min tick: 20" on my machine. Given that 12 is running stable here, maybe > the value is a bit too large? Err, 20==0x14 so it's not that much difference and it's running fine here also. Feel free to add: Reported-and-tested-by: Markus Trippelsdorf Thanks. -- Markus