From: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
To: Matthias Urlichs <smurf@smurf.noris.de>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, bunk@stusta.de,
lethal@linux-sh.org, hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp,
asit.k.mallick@intel.com
Subject: Re: REGRESSION: the new i386 timer code fails to sync CPUs
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060731184701.A4592@unix-os.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060730215509.GA3662@kiste.smurf.noris.de>; from smurf@smurf.noris.de on Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 11:55:09PM +0200
On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 11:55:09PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Arjan van de Ven:
> > if the hardware side is different *speed*.. then a tsc sync ain't going
> > to work... sure we write to it but it's immediately out of sync again
> >
> No, it's in fact the same speed -- the BIOS just reads it wrongly.
It sounds to me as a BIOS issue. From the boot log, it is quite clear that
TSCs are running at different speeds(different bogomips show this).
This CPU stepping has constant TSC behavior. So this is most probably happening
because of bios setting different core to bus clock ratios for each package.
Different CPU speed BIOS issue that you mention also points to this.
Can you check if your BIOS settings are set to max ratio(15?) available?
or try an updated BIOS?
>
> I checked: the two date values do advance at the same rate.
Perhaps data overflow(because of unsync TSC's) in timer code calculations
may be causing this?
thanks,
suresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-01 1:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-22 23:36 REGRESSION: the new i386 timer code fails to sync CPUs Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-23 0:36 ` Andrew Morton
2006-07-23 8:16 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-23 11:46 ` Andrew Morton
2006-07-23 12:08 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-23 12:37 ` Andrew Morton
2006-07-23 12:58 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-24 15:52 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2006-07-24 15:58 ` john stultz
2006-07-24 17:17 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-24 17:51 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-24 20:54 ` john stultz
2006-07-30 9:03 ` Andrew Morton
2006-07-30 9:49 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-30 20:10 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-30 20:55 ` Andrew Morton
2006-07-30 21:13 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-30 21:20 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-07-30 21:55 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-08-01 1:47 ` Siddha, Suresh B [this message]
2006-08-01 3:14 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-30 21:57 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-30 22:28 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-31 14:24 ` Matthias Urlichs
2006-07-24 17:39 ` Andi Kleen
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=20060731184701.A4592@unix-os.sc.intel.com \
--to=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=asit.k.mallick@intel.com \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=smurf@smurf.noris.de \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox