[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <35572.194.65.103.1.1181643050.squirrel@www.rncbc.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:10:50 +0100 (WEST)
From: "Rui Nuno Capela" <rncbc@...bc.org>
To: "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: "Daniel Walker" <dwalker@...sta.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.21-rt2..8 troubles
On Tue, June 12, 2007 00:08, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 15:34 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 23:42 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 22:25 +0100, Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nope. It's a Fujitsu-Siemens Amilo Si 1520 -- Intel Core2 Duo
>>>> T7200@...Ghz.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, there are Dell ones which have similar or worse symptoms.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Works great with 2.6.21-rt1, and 2.6.22-rc4-hrt5, but that you
>>>> already know :)
>>>
>>> Ok. I go back and figure out which differences we have between
>>> 2.6.21-rt>8 and the -hrt queue.
>>>
>>
>> Are you sure it's strictly and HRT issue? I didn't see a
>> !CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS test ..
>>
>
> The main difference between -rt1 and -rt2 was the update of -hrt, which
> not only affects CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS. There are enough
> CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS=n related changes to clock events and friends as
> well.
>
In deed, FWIW and IIRC, I can confirm that the show-stopper problem was
still present when tried with CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS not set (=N).
Bye now.
--
rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela
rncbc@...bc.org
-
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