On Sat, 2005-09-03 at 00:05 -0400, 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.
Pavel came up with a pretty good test for this awhile back. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=110519095425851&w=2 Adding: unsigned long mask = 0x1; sched_setaffinity(0, sizeof(mask), &mask); to the top helps it work on SMP systems. thanks -john - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
