[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0812212217220.3739@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 22:19:12 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: dsaxena@...xity.net
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TSC not updating after resume: Bug or Feature?
Deepak,
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008, Deepak Saxena wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am using ftrace to get a detailed timing analysis of the resume process
> on the OLPC XO laptop and am seeing that when we start running again, the
> system timestamep is not being updated for several (hundreds of) thousands
> of cycles (~2000 ftrace entries). From following the ftrace, what is
> happening is that the clocksource is not updated until we run the cpu_idle()
> thread due to an explicit scheduling operation in the resume path that occurs
> via call to msleep from pci_set_power_state(). As I'm still fully groking the
> timekeeping code, the question(s) I have is whether this is expected behaviour
> and I should not assume valid timestamp data in the initial bits of the suspend path,
> whether this is an OLPC-specific bug, or whether I've uncovered a generic bug in
> the timekeeping implementation. This is on 2.6.27.7 as I've not gotten 28-rc
> up and running on the XO but can move that up in priority if this behaviour
> is different in newer kernels.
Can you please upload the full trace somewhere ?
Thanks,
tglx
--
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