[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20061011142646.eb41fac3.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:26:46 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386 Time: Avoid PIT SMP lockups
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 12:54:21 -0700
john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com> wrote:
> Andrew: I think this is 2.6.19 material, but probably should go through an -mm or two.
>
> thanks
> -john
>
>
> This patch avoids possible PIT livelock issues seen on SMP systems (and
> reported by Andi), by not allowing it as a clocksource on SMP boxes.
>
> However, since the PIT may no longer be present, we have to properly
> handle the cases where SMP systems have TSC skew and fall back from the
> TSC. Since the PIT isn't there, it would "fall back" to the TSC again.
> So this changes the jiffies rating to 1, and the TSC-bad rating value to
> 0.
>
> Thus you will get the following behavior priority on i386 systems:
>
> tsc [if present & stable]
> hpet [if present]
> cyclone [if present]
> acpi_pm [if present]
> pit [if UP]
> jiffies
>
> Rather then the current more complicated:
> tsc [if present & stable]
> hpet [if present]
> cyclone [if present]
> acpi_pm [if present]
> pit [if cpus < 4]
Actually <=4, and that matters: there are a lot of 4-ways.
> tsc [if present & unstable]
> jiffies
>
So this patch has the potential to screw up people who have 2-way or 4-way,
no hpet/pm-timer and dodgy TSCs.
Wouldn't it be better to fix the livelock? What's causing it?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists