public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Alok Kataria <akataria@vmware.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Arjan van de Veen <arjan@infradead.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Dan Hecht <dhecht@vmware.com>, Garrett Smith <garrett@vmware.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch 0/4] TSC calibration improvements
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 00:40:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080906224016.GA9229@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0809061351170.3117@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>


* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> "expect" is an unsigned char. There are absolutely _zero_ issues with 
> overflow, underflow, random phases of the moon, madness levels or 
> anything else. But yes, it does look like Ingo screwed up when adding 
> that final check, since expect was already decremented at the end of 
> the loop.
> 
> Ingo? Did you actually test it?

hm, yes, that's my brown paper bag fault, sorry.

I did that addition in tip/x86/tsc and posted it to you and i did test 
it immediately - and i noticed that i never saw the fast-calibration 
message i expected to see. I even pasted the boot log over irc yesterday 
and i still have it:

 *> [  0.000] TSC: PIT calibration deviates from PMTIMER: 738839 846296.
 *> [  0.000] TSC: Using PIT calibration value
 *> [  0.000] Detected 738.839 MHz processor.
 *> does not seem to trigger anywhere

i wanted to debug that problem straight after i worked down my 800+ 
mails post-vacation mbox :-/ Which state i reached about 2 hours ago so 
i'm now free - the fix is below.

i _think_ that the quality of calibration should now be pretty OK with 
latest -git. The clever fast calibration stuff could be .28 material. 

And/or we could change the 5x 50msec calibration to 3x 30msec right now, 
the precision is still plenty and the 90 msec is then replaced with your 
fast-calibrate method anyway on proper boxes. Hm?

	Ingo

------------------->
>From 5df45515512436a808d3476a90e83f2efb022422 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 23:55:40 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] x86, tsc calibration: fix

my brown paperbag day ...

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
index 6dab90f..4847a92 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
@@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ static unsigned long quick_pit_calibrate(void)
 		/*
 		 * Make sure we can rely on the second TSC timestamp:
 		 */
-		if (!pit_expect_msb(--expect))
+		if (!pit_expect_msb(expect))
 			goto failed;
 
 		/*

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-09-06 22:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-09-04 15:18 [RFC patch 0/4] TSC calibration improvements Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-04 15:18 ` [RFC patch 1/4] x86: TSC: define the PIT latch value separate Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-04 15:18 ` [RFC patch 2/4] x86: TSC: separate hpet/pmtimer calculation out Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-04 15:18 ` [RFC patch 3/4] x86: TSC: use one set of reference variables Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-04 15:18 ` [RFC patch 4/4] x86: TSC make the calibration loop smarter Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-04 15:36 ` [RFC patch 0/4] TSC calibration improvements Ingo Molnar
2008-09-04 15:45   ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 16:00     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-04 16:21       ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 16:36         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-04 17:41         ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 18:07           ` Alan Cox
2008-09-04 18:26             ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 18:30               ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-09-04 20:09               ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 20:43                 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-04 20:52                   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-04 21:09                     ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 21:21                       ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-04 21:30                         ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 21:34                           ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 21:39                             ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-04 21:33                       ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-05 22:18                         ` Alok Kataria
2008-09-05 22:34                           ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-06 20:03                             ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-06 20:29                               ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-06 20:37                                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-06 20:50                                   ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-06 20:55                                     ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-06 21:15                                       ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-06 21:22                                         ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-06 21:30                                           ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-06 22:40                                       ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-09-06 20:58                                     ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-06 21:10                                       ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-07  6:01                                         ` Willy Tarreau
2008-09-06 20:52                                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-06 20:59                                     ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-06 21:07                                       ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-06 21:15                                         ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-06 21:26                                           ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-09-06 21:32                                             ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 20:53                   ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 21:38                 ` Alok Kataria
2008-09-04 21:52                   ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 22:09                     ` Alok Kataria
2008-09-04 17:39     ` Alok Kataria
2008-09-04 17:53       ` Linus Torvalds
2008-09-04 18:31         ` Alok Kataria
2008-09-04 18:34           ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-09-04 21:00   ` Valdis.Kletnieks

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=20080906224016.GA9229@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akataria@vmware.com \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=dhecht@vmware.com \
    --cc=garrett@vmware.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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