On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 02:37:45PM -0800, Jason Harmening wrote:
> I can confirm this patch works. HPET is now chosen over LAPIC as the
> eventtimer source, and the system works smoothly without disabling C2 or
> mwait.
Thank you for the testing.
The change was committed to HEAD as r309189.
I can confirm this patch works. HPET is now chosen over LAPIC as the
eventtimer source, and the system works smoothly without disabling C2 or
mwait.
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 4:12 AM, Jason Harmening
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Konstantin Belousov
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Konstantin Belousov
wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 06:28:08PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 09:18:15AM -0700, Jason Harmening wrote:
> > > I think you are probably right. Hacking out the Intel-specific
> > >
On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 06:28:08PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 09:18:15AM -0700, Jason Harmening wrote:
> > I think you are probably right. Hacking out the Intel-specific
> > additions to C-state parsing in acpi_cpu_cx_cst() from r282678 (thus
> > going back to
On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:23:24 -0400 George Mitchell
wrote:
>On 11/01/16 23:45, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Jason Harmening
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry, that should be ~*30ms* to get 30fps, though the variance is still
On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 18:28:08 +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 09:18:15AM -0700, Jason Harmening wrote:
> > I think you are probably right. Hacking out the Intel-specific
> > additions to C-state parsing in acpi_cpu_cx_cst() from r282678 (thus
> > going back to
On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 09:18:15AM -0700, Jason Harmening wrote:
> I think you are probably right. Hacking out the Intel-specific
> additions to C-state parsing in acpi_cpu_cx_cst() from r282678 (thus
> going back to sti;hlt instead of monitor+mwait at C1) fixed the problem
> for me. But r282678
On 11/02/16 00:55, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:29:13PM -0700, Jason Harmening wrote:
>> repro code is at http://pastebin.com/B68N4AFY if anyone's interested.
>>
>> On 11/01/16 13:58, Jason Harmening wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I recently upgraded my main amd64
On 11/01/16 23:45, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Jason Harmening
> wrote:
>
>> Sorry, that should be ~*30ms* to get 30fps, though the variance is still
>> up to 500ms for me either way.
>>
>> On 11/01/16 14:29, Jason Harmening wrote:
>>> repro
On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:29:13PM -0700, Jason Harmening wrote:
> repro code is at http://pastebin.com/B68N4AFY if anyone's interested.
>
> On 11/01/16 13:58, Jason Harmening wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I recently upgraded my main amd64 server from 10.3-stable (r302011) to
> > 11.0-stable
On 11/01/16 22:49, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Jason Harmening
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/01/16 20:45, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Jason Harmening
> >
On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Jason Harmening
wrote:
>
>
> On 11/01/16 20:45, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Jason Harmening
> > > wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, that should be ~*30ms*
On 11/01/16 20:45, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Jason Harmening
> > wrote:
>
> Sorry, that should be ~*30ms* to get 30fps, though the variance is still
> up to 500ms for me either way.
>
> On
On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:36 PM, Jason Harmening
wrote:
> Sorry, that should be ~*30ms* to get 30fps, though the variance is still
> up to 500ms for me either way.
>
> On 11/01/16 14:29, Jason Harmening wrote:
> > repro code is at http://pastebin.com/B68N4AFY if
Sorry, that should be ~*30ms* to get 30fps, though the variance is still
up to 500ms for me either way.
On 11/01/16 14:29, Jason Harmening wrote:
> repro code is at http://pastebin.com/B68N4AFY if anyone's interested.
>
> On 11/01/16 13:58, Jason Harmening wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I recently
repro code is at http://pastebin.com/B68N4AFY if anyone's interested.
On 11/01/16 13:58, Jason Harmening wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I recently upgraded my main amd64 server from 10.3-stable (r302011) to
> 11.0-stable (r308099). It went smoothly except for one big issue:
> certain applications
Hi everyone,
I recently upgraded my main amd64 server from 10.3-stable (r302011) to
11.0-stable (r308099). It went smoothly except for one big issue:
certain applications (but not the system as a whole) respond very
sluggishly, and video playback of any kind is extremely choppy.
The system is
17 matches
Mail list logo