From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bill Burns Subject: Re: Large system boot problems Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 10:10:26 -0500 Message-ID: <47AC70E2.6090900@redhat.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: Ian Pratt , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, "Carb, Brian A" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Keir Fraser wrote: > On 8/2/08 13:49, "Bill Burns" wrote: > >> Looking for ideas or suggestions on how to solve this issue. >> Ideally we'd be able to prevent the bogus calculation in the >> first place. > > Could the bad value coming from calibration in init_pit_and_calibrate_tsc(), > or perhaps it is somehow caused perhaps by not-frequent-enough softirq > handling on CPU0 as it brings up all the secondary CPUs (and hence it is not > going through local_time_calibration() during that period)? > The message from early_time_init (caller of iinit_pit_and_calibrate_tsc, indicates that the initial detection is ok: (pmtimer case) (XEN) Detected 3400.114 MHz processor. ((pit case) (XEN) Detected 3400.165 MHz processor. So I think it's the latter. The init of a large system is staving off the soft irq so that the next calc fails. Bill (XEN) Detected 3400.114 MHz processor. > -- Keir > >