Jan Kiszka wrote:
Jim Cromie wrote:
FYI,
Ive just built 17-rc1-mm1, and noted that the new time-keeping-system
http://lwn.net/Articles/176837/
can now detect the buggy TSC on my GEODE-sc1100 cpu,
and also that its apparently fixable by adding 'idle=poll' to
kernel-boot-line.
Keeps your CPU safe and warm, I guess. ;)
for me personally, its the new-found certainty that the bug is
repeatedly observable and correctable :-)
Ive historically had an issue with my ntp-server on this box,
which slips badly when running latency tests under certain conditions
(ie, the dd workload is using /dev/hda, a real interrupt source, rather
than /dev/zero)
FWIW, my 2.6.16-ipipe-122 kernel takes a *long* time to boot,
even while printk numbers look good.
The delays/pauses are in several subsystems, most notably after these
dmesg lines:
[ 30.768098] Uniform Multi-Platform E-IDE driver Revision: 7.00alpha2
[ 30.775141] ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes;
override with idebus=xx
(1 min pause)
[ 31.209246] hda: SanDisk SDCFB-512, CFA DISK drive
[ 30.561093] Serial: 8250/16550 driver $Revision: 1.90 $ 4 ports, IRQ
sharing disabled
30.574876] serial8250: ttyS0 at I/O 0x3f8 (irq = 4) is a 16550A
[ 30.586719] serial8250: ttyS1 at I/O 0x2f8 (irq = 3) is a 16550A
(more delays, in various spots, and Im now much more aware of them..)
FWIW, before now, Ive never needed idle=poll, so it seems that
adeos/xenomai
is more sensitive to these long delays than vanilla linux, (same for more
recent versions of kernel adeos). OTOH, Ive only recently added
timestamps to
printks, and Im also a bit more sensitive now than I once was ..
Does it make any sense that adeos / xenomai is more sensitive to a bad TSC
than it used to be ?
thanks
jimc
___
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core