From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 17:19:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 17:19:31 -0500 Received: from ns.ithnet.com ([217.64.64.10]:13071 "HELO heather.ithnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 17:19:12 -0500 Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 23:18:50 +0100 From: Stephan von Krawczynski To: Alan Cox Cc: adam@os.inf.tu-dresden.de, fernando@quatro.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: Re: 2.4.18-rcx: Dual P3 + VIA + APIC Message-Id: <20020223231850.4ea9d3ca.skraw@ithnet.com> In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: <20020223173857.3db89749.skraw@ithnet.com> Organization: ith Kommunikationstechnik GmbH X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.2 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 23 Feb 2002 17:22:01 +0000 (GMT) Alan Cox wrote: > > <4>CPU1 > > <4>checking TSC synchronization across CPUs: passed. > > <4>Waiting on wait_init_idle (map = 0x2) > > <4>All processors have done init_idle > > > > I would say this means the TSC skew fix is broken and shooting down your box. What do you think, Alan? > > Seems a reasonable guess. However that TSC skew itself may point to other > problems. It means one processor started running successfully a little after > the other. That might be normal behaviour for that board or might point to > something else It seems no normal behaviour, I checked several other boards of this type and none had a TSC skew (and all work). Purely guessing I would suggest two try some other 2 processors to verify the behaviour is really processor-independent. Another guess would of course be the MB itself being broken to some extent. Has anybody ever seen a _working_ skew correction? Is this known-to-work code? Regards, Stephan