Re: Network performance degradation from 2.6.11.12 to 2.6.16.20

["Vladimir B. Savkin" <master@sectorb.msk.ru>]

On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 01:27:57PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> The codebase for timing (and lots of other things) is quite different
> between 32bit and 64bit. You're really surprised it doesn't work if you do such things?
> 
It works, and after your remark above, I'm surprised.
Dunno about slow TSC drift though, there was not enough time passed to
detect it, and I hope we will have this problem soved in a better way
before the drift becomes visible :)

> > But the question is, why stock 2.6.18-rc7 could not use TSC on its own?
> 
> x86-64 doesn't use the TSC when it deems it to not be reliable, which
> is the case on your system.
>  
Could it at least print something so that I know that using TSC  was
considered, but rejected?

> > What hardware exactly. Doesn't it affect only CPU? And they are not
> > know to fail before any other components.
> 
> All hardware. It's basic physics.

Hm, what other hardware is affected by idle=poll? Does this option ear
out HDDs?
~
:wq
                                        With best regards, 
                                           Vladimir Savkin. 

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/