Re: "clock timer configuration lost" on Serverworks chipset

[Jim Castleberry <jcastle@in-system.com>]

I'm confused.  The 2.2.19 time.c is already doing ">":
    /* VIA686a test code... reset the latch if count > max */
    if (count > LATCH-1) {
        [adjust count and whine]
The 2.2.20-pre2 patch doesn't change time.c, and I don't see
this code in 2.4.4 or 2.4.5pre.

Are you saying the code should be doing the equivalent of
"(count > LATCH)", or is 2.2.19 correct and the whines I'm
seeing mean there really is a problem with the Serverworks
chipset?

Thanks,

jcastle

Alan Cox wrote:
>Jim Castleberry)wrote:
>> How well has the problem been nailed down?  Could it be that it just
>> showed up first on VIA and the real cause (and fix) remains to be
>> discovered?  Or does Serverworks somehow have an identical bug in
>> their chipset?
>
>There is a notional off by one in the check at least by the rules of the
>original chip which do allow the overflow value to be visible momentarily.
>Later -ac checks for > not >=
>