Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible?

2002-02-17 Thread Glenn Gombert
I also see these messages on my Dell 410 Workstation at work and a Dual PIII Box I use at home to do builds with...they just seem to 'come and go' with no particular pattern to them...I have just been ignoring them for the most part...they don't really seem to cause any problems.. At 06:54

Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible?

2002-02-17 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bruce Evans writes: This occurs both with and without the gettimeofday Giant-removal patch, so I am fairly sure it has nothing to do with any of my current work. This is running -current on a DELL2550 (2xCPUs), compiled with the SMP option. The Gian removal

Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible?

2002-02-17 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matthew Dillon wri tes: :I just wrote the following fix for some of the overflow problems. I don't understand how this code is supposed to handle overflows. You seem only to be checking to see if the master timecounter has changed to a different type.

Success! Sorta! (was Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible? )

2002-02-17 Thread Matthew Dillon
:Bruce's patch amounts to a retry if the current timecounter was updated :while we were calculating time. It is a bit more defensive than it :needs to be and generally pessimizes the timecounters elegant lockless :design a fair bit, but it is still much better than slamming a mutex :around the

Re: Success! Sorta! (was Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible? )

2002-02-17 Thread Matthew Dillon
Whoop! I take it back. I'm still getting the errors: microuptime() went backwards (458.168990 - 458.168882) microuptime() went backwards (578.609995 - 577.929801) microuptime() went backwards (748.912755 - 748.237402) microuptime() went backwards (775.159625 - 775.159612) I also think

Re: Success! Sorta! (was Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible? )

2002-02-17 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matthew Dillon wri tes: However, I think to be complete we need to make it even less elegant. The TC module is only flip-flopping between two time counters, which means that it can flip-flop twice and the test will not work. We need a generation

Re: Success! Sorta! (was Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible? )

2002-02-17 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matthew Dillon wri tes: Whoop! I take it back. I'm still getting the errors: microuptime() went backwards (458.168990 - 458.168882) microuptime() went backwards (578.609995 - 577.929801) microuptime() went backwards (748.912755 - 748.237402) microuptime() went

Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible?

2002-02-17 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
Matt, Easy now, there is more depth to it than that... I have promised myself to get the timecounter paper written and I'll probably present it at BSDcon-euro-2002 in Amsterdam if they want to listen to me. For now, lets concentrate on the PIIX hardware because that's where the problem seems

Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible?

2002-02-17 Thread Michael Smith
If this patch cures the PIIX problem, something I'm not at all convinced about, it should go in, if not only the comment should go in. I would like to see the PIIX problem caught on camera, personally. We're aware of one errata for it already, and we work around it. If there's another

Re: ACPI timer is screwed... (was Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible? )

2002-02-17 Thread Michael Smith
:I would like to see the PIIX problem caught on camera, personally. :We're aware of one errata for it already, and we work around it. If :there's another problem, or ideally if someone has some relatively quick :code to test it, that would be much better. Holy shit. We are

Re: ACPI timer is screwed... (was Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible? )

2002-02-17 Thread Matthew Dillon
:Sounds like we need to smack whoever made your chipset as well. Intel :learned their lesson (finally) with later revisions of the PIIX4. I'm :guessing you're running this against a ServerWorks system. atapci0: ServerWorks ROSB4 ATA33 controller port 0x8b0-0x8bf at device 15.1 on pci0

Re: ACPI timer is screwed... (was Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible? )

2002-02-17 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matthew Dillon wri tes: :I would like to see the PIIX problem caught on camera, personally. :We're aware of one errata for it already, and we work around it. If :there's another problem, or ideally if someone has some relatively quick :code to test it, that

Re: ACPI timer is screwed... (was Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible? )

2002-02-17 Thread Michael Smith
:I would like to see the PIIX problem caught on camera, personally. :We're aware of one errata for it already, and we work around it. If :there's another problem, or ideally if someone has some relatively quick :code to test it, that would be much better. Holy shit. We are

Re: Success! Sorta! (was Re: 'microuptime() went backwards ...'using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible? )

2002-02-17 Thread Bruce Evans
On Sun, 17 Feb 2002, Matthew Dillon wrote: Whoop! I take it back. I'm still getting the errors: microuptime() went backwards (458.168990 - 458.168882) microuptime() went backwards (578.609995 - 577.929801) microuptime() went backwards (748.912755 - 748.237402) microuptime() went

'microuptime() went backwards ...' using ACPI timer. Shouldn't that be impossible?

2002-02-16 Thread Matthew Dillon
Testing with a 'make -j 10 buildworld' on a -current box I am getting regular: microuptime() went backwards (146.826785 - 146.156715) microuptime() went backwards (146.826782 - 146.228636) ... microuptime() went backwards (8945.938288 - 8945.251603) microuptime() went