From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <448482B4.2040105@domain.hid> Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 21:15:00 +0200 From: Philippe Gerum MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] nervous nmi-watchdog References: <44736EE4.2060807@domain.hid> <44845D59.5040608@domain.hid> <17540.32930.566897.960413@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <17540.32930.566897.960413@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: Jan Kiszka , xenomai-core Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: > > Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm getting nmi alarms about latency being > 100 us on a dual P-III 1GHz > > > (with and without CONFIG_SMP) once I start the latency test tool. But > > > the must be false positive. Can someone comment on this trace: > > > > > > > Issue confirmed here, on a dual 750 Mhz PIII Celeron. Starting the > > latency test, the NMI watchdog pulls the break on cpu #0 after a few us, > > albeit rthal_nmi_arm() had been told to trigger the NMI more than a > > millisecond in the future (likely the HTICK emulation + 100 us NMI > > threshold). > > > > Running a UP + LAPIC enabled kernel on the same hw did not trigger the > > spurious NMI, so I'd bet that the issue is SMP related, and not > > hw/perfctr related. > > I never observe this on my dual PIII whereas I always have the NMI > watchdog option enabled. Are you running with or without the tracer ? > w/o. -- Philippe.