From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
discuss@x86-64.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH] x86-64: Fix bad assumption that dualcore cpus have synced TSCs
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 00:03:42 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050921040342.GA7175@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1127242785.11080.20.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 11:59:45AM -0700, john stultz wrote:
> So, bugzilla.kernel.org has (temporarily at least) lost the reports from
> yesterday, but from the email i got, folks using my TSC consistency
> check that I posted were seeing what appears to be unsynched TSCs on
> dualcore AMD systems.
>
> Personally I suspect that the powernow driver is putting the cores
> independently into low power sleep and the TSCs are being independently
> halted, causing them to become unsynchronized.
>
> Do you still feel there is some other issue here? Any ideas for shaking
> out whatever else might in play?
FYI, at least I have reproduced this without powernow loaded.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-21 4:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-19 19:16 [PATCH] x86-64: Fix bad assumption that dualcore cpus have synced TSCs john stultz
2005-09-19 19:31 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-19 19:42 ` john stultz
2005-09-19 19:49 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2005-09-20 18:59 ` john stultz
2005-09-21 4:03 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2005-09-21 15:15 ` Ray Bryant
2005-09-21 15:04 ` Andi Kleen
2005-09-21 15:46 ` Ray Bryant
2005-09-22 8:00 ` Jonas Oreland
2005-09-21 20:17 ` Andrew Morton
2005-10-07 12:26 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2005-10-07 12:31 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-07 14:15 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2005-10-07 14:21 ` [discuss] " Velu Erwan
2005-10-08 10:11 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2005-10-10 18:03 ` john stultz
2005-10-10 18:12 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2005-10-10 18:19 ` Jonas Oreland
2005-10-11 7:35 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2005-10-11 8:06 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-11 16:27 ` Jonas Oreland
2005-10-25 7:35 ` x86-64: Syncing dualcore cpus TSCs Jonas Oreland
2005-10-25 7:42 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-26 0:05 ` David Lang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-09-20 19:13 [discuss] Re: [PATCH] x86-64: Fix bad assumption that dualcore cpus have synced TSCs Langsdorf, Mark
2005-09-20 19:24 ` Scott Lampert
2005-09-20 19:30 ` john stultz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050921040342.GA7175@nevyn.them.org \
--to=dan@debian.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.