From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262497AbVHDMSr (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2005 08:18:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262493AbVHDMQo (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2005 08:16:44 -0400 Received: from mail18.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.199]:57013 "EHLO mail18.syd.optusnet.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262497AbVHDMJL (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2005 08:09:11 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ck] [ANNOUNCE] Interbench 0.27 Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 22:04:57 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 Cc: Gabriel Devenyi , ck@vds.kolivas.org, Jake Moilanen References: <200508031758.31246.kernel@kolivas.org> <200508042146.13710.kernel@kolivas.org> <42F2047A.1050906@staticwave.ca> In-Reply-To: <42F2047A.1050906@staticwave.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508042204.57977.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 22:05, Gabriel Devenyi wrote: > Con Kolivas wrote: > > I have to think about it. This seems a problem only on one type of cpu > > for some strange reason (lemme guess; athlon?) and indeed leaving out the > > sleep 1 followed by the check made results far less reliable. This way > > with the sleep 1 I have not had spurious results returned by the > > calibration. I'm open to suggestions if anyone's got one. > > Yeah, thats right, it spins forever on both my athlon-tbird and my > athlon64 (in x86_64 mode). I'll take another look at the code tonight, > to see if I can figure out why its causing this, or another way of > incurring the delay you're looking for. I'd appreciate it. It's almost like some power stepping that's responsible. I've never seen it happen on any intel processor (including the pentiumM ones which have truckloads of power saving features). I've asked many people if they're running some equivalent of cool'n'quiet or powernow* and they all insist they're not... I'm not that familiar with all the powersaving techs though. Cheers, Con