On Fri, 2005-06-03 at 01:29 -0600, Frank Sorenson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> john stultz wrote:
> > Andrew, All,
> > I'm just re-spinning this to resolve a conflict w/ the CPUFREQ changes
> > Linus accepted last night.
> <snip>
>
> John,
>
> I have found an issue with these TOD subsystem patches, and I
> think it's only an issue on systems that use CPUFREQ. Whenever
> the frequency changes, at least some portions of the kernel
> get confused about their notion of time. Here are some
> example entries from my syslog:
>
> Jun 3 00:33:40 moebius kernel: [ 145.023201] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 800000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:33:47 moebius kernel: [ 114.838909] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 1000000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:33:47 moebius kernel: [ 114.838977] freq-table: request for target 1000000 kHz (relation: 0) for cpu 0
> Jun 3 00:33:47 moebius kernel: [ 92.161872] codec_semaphore: semaphore is not ready [0x1][0x700300]
> Jun 3 00:33:52 moebius kernel: [ 97.433279] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 1200000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:33:58 moebius kernel: [ 66.352233] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 1400000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:34:08 moebius kernel: [ 85.547260] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 1200000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:34:16 moebius kernel: [ 211.791738] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 800000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:34:27 moebius kernel: [ 112.941898] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 1000000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:34:31 moebius kernel: [ 231.793121] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 800000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:34:41 moebius kernel: [ 147.122593] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 1200000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:34:42 moebius kernel: [ 123.906802] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 1000000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:34:46 moebius kernel: [ 251.342116] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 800000 kHz, relation 0
> Jun 3 00:34:51 moebius kernel: [ 192.985214] cpufreq-core: target for CPU 0: 1000000 kHz, relation 0
>
> The printk times are taken from sched_clock(), which now
> varies depending on the cpu frequency. Without these patches,
> the printk times appear to consistently increase at the right rate.
> I'm not sure what other portions of the kernel are affected by
> this (watchdogs firing, or other issues?).
Yep, looks like something isn't right between sched_clock and the
cpufreq changes. I'll let you know when I've sorted it out.
Thanks for the great testing!
-john
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]