[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0902261413400.3111@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:24:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, Jesper Krogh <jesper@...gh.cc>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.29-rc6
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> Is the delta anything NTP might get upset about:
>
> 2.6.26: time.c: Detected 2311.847 MHz processor.
> 2.6.29: Detected 2310.029 MHz processor.
>
> If yes, then we need to fix NTP not the calibration code :)
Well, that _is_ about 500ppm difference, and we claim that we _should_
have reached 150ppm with the 15ms delay. We clearly don't seem to have
done that. I'm not quite sure why - we _should_ be finding the edge of the
PIT events to within roughly a microsecond (assuming that's about as long
as an "inb" takes), and that should give us a pretty good fast
calibration, but maybe I'm overlooking something.
Or - and this may be more likely - there are chipsets that aren't very
good at reading the PIT in a tight loop. That may explain why it's a
problem on Jesper's hardware, but we haven't gotten tons of reports of
this from others.
I see that it's a SunFire X2200, which I think uses an nVidia HT
southbridge. I assume it's an nForce4 thing. There shouldn't be anything
odd there, and the PIT read shouldn't be taking any longer than on
anything else, but who knows?
Linus
--
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