Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
I do have CONFIG_X86_PM_TIMER enabled, but it seems by board does not
have such piece of hardware:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$ dmesg | grep -i "time\|tick\|apic"
PCI: Setting latency timer of device :00:11.5 to 64
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$
If you
Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
I do have CONFIG_X86_PM_TIMER enabled, but it seems by board does not
have such piece of hardware:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$ dmesg | grep -i time\|tick\|apic
PCI: Setting latency timer of device :00:11.5 to 64
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$
If you are
Hi!
> > > > Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
> > > > is used, I get same behaviour as before ("sleepy machine"). With
> > > > "notsc", machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
> > > > interrupts a second.
> > >
> > > Sounds like dyn-tick did not
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050206 04:15]:
> Hi!
>
> > +extern void disable_pit_tick(void);
> > +extern void reprogram_pit_tick(int jiffies_to_skip);
> > +extern void reprogram_apic_timer(unsigned int count);
> > +extern void reprogram_pit_tick(int jiffies_to_skip);
>
>
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050206 00:20]:
> Hi!
>
> > > > Currently the suggested combo is local APIC + ACPI PM timer...
> > >
> > > Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
> > > is used, I get same behaviour as before ("sleepy machine"). With
> > >
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050206 00:50]:
> Hi!
>
> > > > Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
> > > > is used, I get same behaviour as before ("sleepy machine"). With
> > > > "notsc", machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
> > > >
Hi!
> +extern void disable_pit_tick(void);
> +extern void reprogram_pit_tick(int jiffies_to_skip);
> +extern void reprogram_apic_timer(unsigned int count);
> +extern void reprogram_pit_tick(int jiffies_to_skip);
reprogram_pit_tick is here twice; but perhaps this should be moved to
some kind of
Hi!
> > I do have CONFIG_X86_PM_TIMER enabled, but it seems by board does not
> > have such piece of hardware:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$ dmesg | grep -i "time\|tick\|apic"
> > PCI: Setting latency timer of device :00:11.5 to 64
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$
>
On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 09:11 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> I do have CONFIG_X86_PM_TIMER enabled, but it seems by board does not
> have such piece of hardware:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$ dmesg | grep -i "time\|tick\|apic"
> PCI: Setting latency timer of device :00:11.5 to 64
>
Hi!
> > > Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
> > > is used, I get same behaviour as before ("sleepy machine"). With
> > > "notsc", machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
> > > interrupts a second.
> >
> > Sounds like your system is not running
Hi!
> > > Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
> > > is used, I get same behaviour as before ("sleepy machine"). With
> > > "notsc", machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
> > > interrupts a second.
>
> ...
>
> >
> > Sounds like your system is
Hi!
> > > Currently the suggested combo is local APIC + ACPI PM timer...
> >
> > Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
> > is used, I get same behaviour as before ("sleepy machine"). With
> > "notsc", machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
> >
Hi!
Currently the suggested combo is local APIC + ACPI PM timer...
Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
is used, I get same behaviour as before (sleepy machine). With
notsc, machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
interrupts a second.
Hi!
Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
is used, I get same behaviour as before (sleepy machine). With
notsc, machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
interrupts a second.
...
Sounds like your system is not running with the
Hi!
Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
is used, I get same behaviour as before (sleepy machine). With
notsc, machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
interrupts a second.
Sounds like your system is not running with the dyn-tick...
On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 09:11 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
I do have CONFIG_X86_PM_TIMER enabled, but it seems by board does not
have such piece of hardware:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$ dmesg | grep -i time\|tick\|apic
PCI: Setting latency timer of device :00:11.5 to 64
[EMAIL
Hi!
I do have CONFIG_X86_PM_TIMER enabled, but it seems by board does not
have such piece of hardware:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$ dmesg | grep -i time\|tick\|apic
PCI: Setting latency timer of device :00:11.5 to 64
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux-mm$
If you are
Hi!
+extern void disable_pit_tick(void);
+extern void reprogram_pit_tick(int jiffies_to_skip);
+extern void reprogram_apic_timer(unsigned int count);
+extern void reprogram_pit_tick(int jiffies_to_skip);
reprogram_pit_tick is here twice; but perhaps this should be moved to
some kind of
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050206 00:50]:
Hi!
Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
is used, I get same behaviour as before (sleepy machine). With
notsc, machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
interrupts a second.
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050206 00:20]:
Hi!
Currently the suggested combo is local APIC + ACPI PM timer...
Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
is used, I get same behaviour as before (sleepy machine). With
notsc, machine seems to work
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050206 04:15]:
Hi!
+extern void disable_pit_tick(void);
+extern void reprogram_pit_tick(int jiffies_to_skip);
+extern void reprogram_apic_timer(unsigned int count);
+extern void reprogram_pit_tick(int jiffies_to_skip);
reprogram_pit_tick is here
Hi!
Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
is used, I get same behaviour as before (sleepy machine). With
notsc, machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000 timer
interrupts a second.
Sounds like dyn-tick did not get enabled then, maybe
* Tony Lindgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050205 18:39]:
> * Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050205 15:08]:
> >
> > Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
> > is used, I get same behaviour as before ("sleepy machine"). With
> > "notsc", machine seems to work okay, but
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050205 15:08]:
> Hi!
>
> > > > > It could also be that the reprogamming of PIT timer does not work on
> > > > > your machine. I chopped off the udelays there... Can you try
> > > > > something like this:
> > > >
> > > > I added the udelays, but behaviour did
Hi!
> > > > It could also be that the reprogamming of PIT timer does not work on
> > > > your machine. I chopped off the udelays there... Can you try
> > > > something like this:
> > >
> > > I added the udelays, but behaviour did not change.
> >
> > Yeah, and if the first patch was working
Hi!
It could also be that the reprogamming of PIT timer does not work on
your machine. I chopped off the udelays there... Can you try
something like this:
I added the udelays, but behaviour did not change.
Yeah, and if the first patch was working better, that means the PIT
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050205 15:08]:
Hi!
It could also be that the reprogamming of PIT timer does not work on
your machine. I chopped off the udelays there... Can you try
something like this:
I added the udelays, but behaviour did not change.
Yeah, and
* Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050205 18:39]:
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050205 15:08]:
Ok, works slightly better: time no longer runs 2x too fast. When TSC
is used, I get same behaviour as before (sleepy machine). With
notsc, machine seems to work okay, but I still get 1000
* Tony Lindgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050204 11:14]:
> * Zwane Mwaikambo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050204 09:54]:
> > On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >
> > > * Zwane Mwaikambo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050204 09:31]:
> > > > On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Yes, it's
* Zwane Mwaikambo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050204 09:54]:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>
> > * Zwane Mwaikambo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050204 09:31]:
> > > On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes, it's safer to keep the timer periodic, although it's
> > > > used for
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> Yes, it's safer to keep the timer periodic, although it's
> used for oneshot purposes for the skips. If the timer interrupt
> got missed for some reason, the system would be able to recover when
> it's in periodic mode.
>
> And with some timers, we can
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Zwane Mwaikambo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050204 09:31]:
> > On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, it's safer to keep the timer periodic, although it's
> > > used for oneshot purposes for the skips. If the timer interrupt
> > > got missed
* Zwane Mwaikambo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050204 09:31]:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>
> > Yes, it's safer to keep the timer periodic, although it's
> > used for oneshot purposes for the skips. If the timer interrupt
> > got missed for some reason, the system would be able to recover
* Zwane Mwaikambo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050203 22:33]:
> On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>
> > > > > It could also be that the reprogamming of PIT timer does not work on
> > > > > your machine. I chopped off the udelays there... Can you try
> > > > > something like this:
> > > >
> > > >
* Zwane Mwaikambo [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050203 22:33]:
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
It could also be that the reprogamming of PIT timer does not work on
your machine. I chopped off the udelays there... Can you try
something like this:
I added the udelays, but
* Zwane Mwaikambo [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050204 09:31]:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Yes, it's safer to keep the timer periodic, although it's
used for oneshot purposes for the skips. If the timer interrupt
got missed for some reason, the system would be able to recover when
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Zwane Mwaikambo [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050204 09:31]:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Yes, it's safer to keep the timer periodic, although it's
used for oneshot purposes for the skips. If the timer interrupt
got missed for some
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Yes, it's safer to keep the timer periodic, although it's
used for oneshot purposes for the skips. If the timer interrupt
got missed for some reason, the system would be able to recover when
it's in periodic mode.
And with some timers, we can do the
* Zwane Mwaikambo [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050204 09:54]:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Zwane Mwaikambo [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050204 09:31]:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Yes, it's safer to keep the timer periodic, although it's
used for oneshot purposes for the
* Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050204 11:14]:
* Zwane Mwaikambo [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050204 09:54]:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Zwane Mwaikambo [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050204 09:31]:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Yes, it's safer to keep the timer
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > It could also be that the reprogamming of PIT timer does not work on
> > > > your machine. I chopped off the udelays there... Can you try
> > > > something like this:
> > >
> > > I added the udelays, but behaviour did not change.
> >
> > Yeah,
* Tony Lindgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050203 15:07]:
> * Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050203 02:57]:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > > > > > > I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not
> > > > > > > > work as
> > > > > > > > expected: system gets "too sleepy". Like it takes a nap
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050203 02:57]:
> Hi!
>
> > > > > > > I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not
> > > > > > > work as
> > > > > > > expected: system gets "too sleepy". Like it takes a nap during
> > > > > > > boot
> > > > > > > after "dyn-tick: Maximum
Hi!
> > > > > > I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work
> > > > > > as
> > > > > > expected: system gets "too sleepy". Like it takes a nap during boot
> > > > > > after "dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339", and key is
> > > > > > needed to make it
Hi!
I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work
as
expected: system gets too sleepy. Like it takes a nap during boot
after dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339, and key is
needed to make it continue boot. Then cursor stops blinking
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050203 02:57]:
Hi!
I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not
work as
expected: system gets too sleepy. Like it takes a nap during
boot
after dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339, and key
* Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050203 15:07]:
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050203 02:57]:
Hi!
I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not
work as
expected: system gets too sleepy. Like it takes a nap during
boot
after
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Tony Lindgren wrote:
It could also be that the reprogamming of PIT timer does not work on
your machine. I chopped off the udelays there... Can you try
something like this:
I added the udelays, but behaviour did not change.
Yeah, and if the first patch
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050202 06:13]:
>
> Hi!
>
> > > > > I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work as
> > > > > expected: system gets "too sleepy". Like it takes a nap during boot
> > > > > after "dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339", and key
Hi!
> > > > I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work as
> > > > expected: system gets "too sleepy". Like it takes a nap during boot
> > > > after "dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339", and key is
> > > > needed to make it continue boot. Then cursor stops
Hi!
> > > Hmmm, that sounds like the local APIC does not wake up the PIT
> > > interrupt properly after sleep. Hitting the keys causes the timer
> > > interrupt to get called, and that explains why it keeps running. But
> > > the timer ticks are not happening as they should for some reason.
> > >
Hi!
> I don't think it's HPET timer, or CONFIG_SMP. It also looks like your
> local APIC timer is working.
>
> If you have a serial console, you can put one letter printks in the
> code. Can you check if you ever get to smp_apic_timer_interrupt()?
> That's where you should get to after the
Hi!
> > > Hmmm, that sounds like the local APIC does not wake up the PIT
> > > interrupt properly after sleep. Hitting the keys causes the timer
> > > interrupt to get called, and that explains why it keeps running. But
> > > the timer ticks are not happening as they should for some reason.
> > >
Hi!
I don't think it's HPET timer, or CONFIG_SMP. It also looks like your
local APIC timer is working.
If you have a serial console, you can put one letter printks in the
code. Can you check if you ever get to smp_apic_timer_interrupt()?
That's where you should get to after the sleep, and
Hi!
Hmmm, that sounds like the local APIC does not wake up the PIT
interrupt properly after sleep. Hitting the keys causes the timer
interrupt to get called, and that explains why it keeps running. But
the timer ticks are not happening as they should for some reason.
This should
Hi!
Hmmm, that sounds like the local APIC does not wake up the PIT
interrupt properly after sleep. Hitting the keys causes the timer
interrupt to get called, and that explains why it keeps running. But
the timer ticks are not happening as they should for some reason.
This should
Hi!
I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work as
expected: system gets too sleepy. Like it takes a nap during boot
after dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339, and key is
needed to make it continue boot. Then cursor stops blinking and
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050202 06:13]:
Hi!
I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work as
expected: system gets too sleepy. Like it takes a nap during boot
after dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339, and key is
needed to make it
On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 15:20 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> I was wondering how Windows handles high res timers, if at all. The
> reason I ask is because I have been reverse engineering a Windows ASIO
> driver, and I find that if the latency is set below about 5ms, by
By default, Windows
* Lee Revell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050201 12:20]:
> On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 13:29 -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
> > tick patch.
>
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering how Windows handles high res timers, if at all. The
>
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050201 13:50]:
> Hi!
>
> > > I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work as
> > > expected: system gets "too sleepy". Like it takes a nap during boot
> > > after "dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339", and key is
> > > needed
Hi!
> > I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work as
> > expected: system gets "too sleepy". Like it takes a nap during boot
> > after "dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339", and key is
> > needed to make it continue boot. Then cursor stops blinking and
> >
* Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050201 03:03]:
> Hi!
>
> > Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
> > tick patch.
> >
> > I've fixed couple of things:
> >
> > - Dyn-tick now supports local APIC timer. This allows longer sleep time
> > inbetween ticks, over
On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 13:29 -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
> tick patch.
Hi,
I was wondering how Windows handles high res timers, if at all. The
reason I ask is because I have been reverse engineering a Windows
Hi!
> Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
> tick patch.
>
> I've fixed couple of things:
>
> - Dyn-tick now supports local APIC timer. This allows longer sleep time
> inbetween ticks, over 1000 ticks compared to 54 ticks with PIT timer.
> It seems to stop
Hi!
Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
tick patch.
I've fixed couple of things:
- Dyn-tick now supports local APIC timer. This allows longer sleep time
inbetween ticks, over 1000 ticks compared to 54 ticks with PIT timer.
It seems to stop timers on
On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 13:29 -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Hi all,
Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
tick patch.
Hi,
I was wondering how Windows handles high res timers, if at all. The
reason I ask is because I have been reverse engineering a Windows ASIO
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050201 03:03]:
Hi!
Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
tick patch.
I've fixed couple of things:
- Dyn-tick now supports local APIC timer. This allows longer sleep time
inbetween ticks, over 1000 ticks compared
Hi!
I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work as
expected: system gets too sleepy. Like it takes a nap during boot
after dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339, and key is
needed to make it continue boot. Then cursor stops blinking and
machine is hung
* Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050201 13:50]:
Hi!
I used your config advices from second mail, still it does not work as
expected: system gets too sleepy. Like it takes a nap during boot
after dyn-tick: Maximum ticks to skip limited to 1339, and key is
needed to make it continue
* Lee Revell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050201 12:20]:
On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 13:29 -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
Hi all,
Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
tick patch.
Hi,
I was wondering how Windows handles high res timers, if at all. The
reason I ask is
On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 15:20 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
I was wondering how Windows handles high res timers, if at all. The
reason I ask is because I have been reverse engineering a Windows ASIO
driver, and I find that if the latency is set below about 5ms, by
By default, Windows multimedia
* Tony Lindgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050127 13:34]:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
> tick patch.
Oops, I guess I should test before posting :)
Looks like CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC=y is currenly needed on uniprocessor
machines to compile. Also
Hi all,
Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
tick patch.
I've fixed couple of things:
- Dyn-tick now supports local APIC timer. This allows longer sleep time
inbetween ticks, over 1000 ticks compared to 54 ticks with PIT timer.
It seems to stop timers on SMP
Hi all,
Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
tick patch.
I've fixed couple of things:
- Dyn-tick now supports local APIC timer. This allows longer sleep time
inbetween ticks, over 1000 ticks compared to 54 ticks with PIT timer.
It seems to stop timers on SMP
* Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050127 13:34]:
Hi all,
Thanks for all the comments, here's an updated version of the dynamic
tick patch.
Oops, I guess I should test before posting :)
Looks like CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC=y is currenly needed on uniprocessor
machines to compile. Also
76 matches
Mail list logo
