From: Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com>
To: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.26-rc5] make HPET_RTC_IRQ track HPET_EMULATE_RTC
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 19:37:34 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <484FFF4E.9020007@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200806101431.21402.david-b@pacbell.net>
David Brownell wrote:
> On Friday 06 June 2008, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
>
>> Remember long ago I had a discussion with you about HPET that
>> steals RTC irq in 'legacy replacement' mode, and rtc driver thus
>> implements rtc on 'top' of hpet.
>>
>> New rtc-cmos driver doesn't do this emulation, thus it isn't compatible
>> with hpet driver.
>
> That was fixed in 9d8af78b07976d4d84e0df491abd4e9db848d0ad (February)
> by Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de> ... if you look at the bug report
> associated with this patch, you'll see that rtc-cmos was working OK
> with HPET, it's just the legacy RTC driver which got confused after
> the recent updates to clock handling.
>
>
>> But there is a solution, I didn't agree with firstly, but then I did, and
>> I do agree now, and that to put hpet in normal mode.
>>
>> What happened with patches that put hpet in normal independent mode?
>
> The story from either Ingo or Thomas (I forget who) was that this is
> another case where we have to cope with BIOS braindamage. Not enough
> BIOS vendors expose the relevant IRQ routing that Linux could default
> to using HPET in what I'd call "sane" mode.
>
> Now, that still kind of implies there could be an option to use sane
> HPET IRQ configuration (doesn't hijack RTC and other IRQs, and there
> could be a per-CPU HPET) on at least the systems where that IRQ routing
> is available. Over time I'd hope that systems like that could become
> the common case. But ... someone else would have to do that work. :)
>
> - Dave
Thanks a lot, next time I compile the kernel, I will enable hpet
Best regards,
Maxim Levitsky
PS:
This is a question to ubuntu devs, I need to ask them, when
they will switch to new rtc driver....
Old driver has some bugs, including no support for suspend/resume, some
troubles with alarm (it sets the alarm when writing to /proc/acpi/alarm,
but it can be cleared by even just reading the time. New driver
correctly sets the alarm at actual suspend time)
Even hpet emulation has some bugs, I even wrote some patches to fix this
and add suspend/resume, but I guess that newer driver is way better, so
no need to fix old one.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-11 16:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-06 5:41 [patch 2.6.26-rc5] make HPET_RTC_IRQ track HPET_EMULATE_RTC David Brownell
2008-06-06 13:44 ` Maxim Levitsky
2008-06-10 21:31 ` David Brownell
2008-06-11 16:37 ` Maxim Levitsky [this message]
2008-06-08 21:00 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 23:05 ` David Brownell
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=484FFF4E.9020007@gmail.com \
--to=maximlevitsky@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david-b@pacbell.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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