Re: [PATCH] dynamic tick patch

[Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>]

* Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> [050119 15:47]:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > > > As this patch is related to the VST/High-Res timers, there
> > > > > > are probably various things that can be merged. I have not
> > > > > > yet looked at what all could be merged.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I'd appreciate some comments and testing!
> > > > > 
> > > > > Good news is that it does seem to reduce number of interrupts. Bad
> > > > > news is that time now runs faster (like "sleep 10" finishes in ~5
> > > > > seconds) and that I could not measure any difference in power
> > > > > consumption.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks for trying it out. I have quite accurate time here on my
> > > > systems, and sleep works as it should. I wonder what's happening on
> > > > your system? If you have a chance, could you please post the results
> > > > from following simple tests?
> > > 
> > > On patched 2.6.11-rc1:
> > > 
> > > [Heh, clock is two times too fast, perhaps that makes ntpdate fail? -- yes.
> > > 
> > > root@amd:~# dmesg | grep -i time; for i in 1 2 3 4 5; do ntpdate -b tak.cesnet.cz && sleep 10; done ; date && sleep 10 && date; while [ 1 ]; do date; done | uniq
> > > PCI: Setting latency timer of device 0000:00:11.5 to 64
> > > dyn-tick: Enabling dynamic tick timer
> > > dyn-tick: Timer using dynamic tick
> > 
> > Thanks. Looks like you're running on PIT only, I guess my patch
> > currently breaks PIT (and possibly HPET) No dmesg message for "
> > "Using XXX for high-res timesource".
> 
> Okay, so I set CONFIG_HPET. CONFIG_X86_TSC was already set, I wonder
> why the code did not use it?

Can you try with no CONFIG_HPET and CONFIG_X86_TCS or X86_PM_TIMER?
I don't have hardware with HPET, so I have not looked at it.

Tony