From: Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>
To: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.26-rc5] make HPET_RTC_IRQ track HPET_EMULATE_RTC
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 19:37:34 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <484FFF4E.9020007@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200806101431.21402.david-b@pacbell.net>
David Brownell wrote:
> On Friday 06 June 2008, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
>
>> Remember long ago I had a discussion with you about HPET that
>> steals RTC irq in 'legacy replacement' mode, and rtc driver thus
>> implements rtc on 'top' of hpet.
>>
>> New rtc-cmos driver doesn't do this emulation, thus it isn't compatible
>> with hpet driver.
>
> That was fixed in 9d8af78b07976d4d84e0df491abd4e9db848d0ad (February)
> by Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de> ... if you look at the bug report
> associated with this patch, you'll see that rtc-cmos was working OK
> with HPET, it's just the legacy RTC driver which got confused after
> the recent updates to clock handling.
>
>
>> But there is a solution, I didn't agree with firstly, but then I did, and
>> I do agree now, and that to put hpet in normal mode.
>>
>> What happened with patches that put hpet in normal independent mode?
>
> The story from either Ingo or Thomas (I forget who) was that this is
> another case where we have to cope with BIOS braindamage. Not enough
> BIOS vendors expose the relevant IRQ routing that Linux could default
> to using HPET in what I'd call "sane" mode.
>
> Now, that still kind of implies there could be an option to use sane
> HPET IRQ configuration (doesn't hijack RTC and other IRQs, and there
> could be a per-CPU HPET) on at least the systems where that IRQ routing
> is available. Over time I'd hope that systems like that could become
> the common case. But ... someone else would have to do that work. :)
>
> - Dave
Thanks a lot, next time I compile the kernel, I will enable hpet
Best regards,
Maxim Levitsky
PS:
This is a question to ubuntu devs, I need to ask them, when
they will switch to new rtc driver....
Old driver has some bugs, including no support for suspend/resume, some
troubles with alarm (it sets the alarm when writing to /proc/acpi/alarm,
but it can be cleared by even just reading the time. New driver
correctly sets the alarm at actual suspend time)
Even hpet emulation has some bugs, I even wrote some patches to fix this
and add suspend/resume, but I guess that newer driver is way better, so
no need to fix old one.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-11 16:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-06 5:41 [patch 2.6.26-rc5] make HPET_RTC_IRQ track HPET_EMULATE_RTC David Brownell
2008-06-06 13:44 ` Maxim Levitsky
2008-06-10 21:31 ` David Brownell
2008-06-11 16:37 ` Maxim Levitsky [this message]
2008-06-08 21:00 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 23:05 ` David Brownell
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=484FFF4E.9020007@gmail.com \
--to=maximlevitsky@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david-b@pacbell.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.