[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081117230403.GA30861@linux-os.sc.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 15:04:03 -0800
From: Venki Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Subject: Re: [git pull] scheduler updates
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 02:50:18PM -0800, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Venki Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com> wrote:
>
> > Patch being discussed on this thread (commit 0d12cdd) has a
> > regression on one of the test systems here.
> >
> > With the patch, I see
> >
> > checking TSC synchronization [CPU#0 -> CPU#1]:
> > Measured 28 cycles TSC warp between CPUs, turning off TSC clock.
> > Marking TSC unstable due to check_tsc_sync_source failed
> >
> > Whereas, without the patch syncs pass fine on all CPUs
> >
> > checking TSC synchronization [CPU#0 -> CPU#1]: passed.
> >
> > Due to this, TSC is marke unstable, when it is not actually unstable.
> > This is because syncs in check_tsc_wrap() goes away due to this commit.
> >
> > As per the discussion on this thread, correct way to fix this is to add
> > explicit syncs as below?
>
> ah. Yes.
>
> Could you please check whether:
>
> > + rdtsc_barrier();
> > start = get_cycles();
> > + rdtsc_barrier();
> > /*
> > * The measurement runs for 20 msecs:
> > */
> > @@ -61,7 +63,9 @@ static __cpuinit void check_tsc_warp(voi
> > */
> > __raw_spin_lock(&sync_lock);
> > prev = last_tsc;
> > + rdtsc_barrier();
> > now = get_cycles();
> > + rdtsc_barrier();
>
> adding the barrier just _after_ the get_cycles() call (but not before
> it) does the trick too? That should be enough in this case.
>
With barrier only after get_cycles, I do see syncs across first few CPUs
passing. But later I see:
checking TSC synchronization [CPU#0 -> CPU#13]:
Measured 4 cycles TSC warp between CPUs, turning off TSC clock.
Marking TSC unstable due to check_tsc_sync_source failed
Thanks,
Venki
--
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