From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756811AbYIIN1v (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 09:27:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752644AbYIIN1n (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 09:27:43 -0400 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:42947 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752015AbYIIN1m (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 09:27:42 -0400 Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 15:27:32 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Frans Pop cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [regression] __tick_program_event of hpet is stuck In-Reply-To: <200809091438.57158.elendil@planet.nl> Message-ID: References: <200809080114.36106.elendil@planet.nl> <200809080313.48910.elendil@planet.nl> <200809091438.57158.elendil@planet.nl> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (LFD 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Frans Pop wrote: > On Tuesday 09 September 2008, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > CE: __tick_program_event of hpet is stuck 1468f1b3c9 1468f1c751 > > > CE: increasing min_delta_ns 5000 to 10000 nsec > > > [...] > > > CE: __tick_program_event of hpet is stuck 33576032f74 33576035684 > > > CE: increasing min_delta_ns 10000 to 20000 nsec > > > [...] > > > CE: __tick_program_event of hpet is stuck 63242b30d28 63242b35b48 > > > CE: increasing min_delta_ns 20000 to 40000 nsec > > > > what's the highest value which you have seen ? > > These are the highest I've seen, but that's possibly because I haven't > left the system running for longer. There's just under an hour between > the messages (kern.log has 00:59:17, 01:56:38, 02:51:23 for the three > increases listed above) with the first fairly shortly after boot. > > I've just awakened the laptop from suspend and will let it sit for the > rest of the day. If I get any higher values I'll let you know. It's nothing to worry about. I out the WARN_ON() there to get some information about the validation of min_delta_ns and to see in which range this happens. I'm going to remove the WARN_ON() and just keep the information that we need to increase the min_delta_ns value for safe operation. Thanks, tglx