public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
To: Mika Tiainen <mikat@iki.fi>
Cc: Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@amd.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Slow clock on AMD 740G chipset
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 20:34:49 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49C919B9.70302@msgid.tls.msk.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ocw8qfwg.fsf@divinity.mikat.iki.fi>

[resurrecting (hopefully) an old thread.
  Top-posting to keep old mess around for reference.]

To refresh what has been said.  Several people observed slow clock
on their - mostly AMD 780g, 740g and 690g-based systems with 2.6.28
2.6.27 kernels.  Slow to a point when ntpd wasn't successful to
keep up with the drift.  It has been said that the motherboards are
flaky or something and that the clocks has to be calibrated, for
which there are known procedures available (adjtimex).  Which helped.
Before the "calibration" the clock were off by ~15 minutes per day.

But today I tried newly released 2.6.29 kernel on one of the affected
systems - just because I wanted to test something else.  And noticed
that the clock is running too fast.  After some calculation I see that
it will run away for about 15 minutes per day, that is, exactly the
number which was used to compensate for slow clock on 2.6.2[78].

So it seems that with 2.6.29, all the motherboards suddenly become
non-flaky and the timers need no calibration anymore, working just
fine.  Other operating systems and kernel versions also agree with
this conclusion of 2.6.29.

Any comments on this strange phenomenon ? :)

Thanks!

/mjt

Mika Tiainen wrote at Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:43:11 +0200:
> On 11 Mar 2009, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 
>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:18:07AM +0100, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 04:16:10PM +0200, Mika Tiainen wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I built a new machine with Gigabyte GA-MA74GM-S2H motherboard that
>>>>> ntpd can't keep synced. Could this be a kernel bug or is it a
>>>>> hardware problem?
>>>>>
>>>>> Installed with Debian 2.6.27 kernel and currently running a self
>>>>> built 2.6.28.1, both have the problem. It's falling behind over
>>>>> 2s/15min:
>>>> That's annoying but I can't really help you with this. Maybe using
>>>> adjtimex as described in section 9.1.6 in
>>>> http://support.ntp.org/bin/view/Support/KnownHardwareIssues is an
>>>> option for you.
>> And adjtimex helped me on all 3 machines.
>> Running it in self-calibrate mode (that 70 sec thing)
>> plus running ntpd was enough for me for now.
> 
> Yes, I'm also using adjtimex+ntpd now with 10024 tick for adjtimex.
> 
>> What's interesting is that some time ago it worked just fine,
>> and, which is even more interesting, windows on this very
>> hardware shows quite good time stability (WITHOUT setting
>> the time using [s]ntp, its ntp client is disabled).
> 
> Something weird is definitely going on under Linux. I got it working by
> chance in 2.6.28 _exactly_ once. Just booted normally and ntpd kept it
> in time without any resets for the week that it was up, next boot with
> the same kernel and it was again falling behind so I installed adjtimex.
> 
> There was no difference in dmesg between working and not working.
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2009-03-24 17:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-20 14:16 Slow clock on AMD 740G chipset Mika Tiainen
2009-01-20 18:46 ` David Rees
2009-03-10 10:18 ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-03-11 10:05   ` Andreas Herrmann
2009-03-11 11:59     ` Michael Tokarev
2009-03-11 14:43       ` Mika Tiainen
2009-03-24 17:34         ` Michael Tokarev [this message]
2009-03-24 22:27           ` john stultz
2009-04-25  1:45           ` David Rees
2009-04-30 23:17             ` David Rees

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=49C919B9.70302@msgid.tls.msk.ru \
    --to=mjt@tls.msk.ru \
    --cc=andreas.herrmann3@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikat@iki.fi \
    /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