From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: [re] Possible 2.6.22 -> 2.6.23 HTB regression? Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:12:43 -0400 Message-ID: <1192021963.4853.21.camel@localhost> References: <20071010124510.M18768@visp.net.lb> <470CC97F.4000906@trash.net> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Denys , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from ik-out-1112.google.com ([66.249.90.182]:50439 "EHLO ik-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752123AbXJJNMs (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:12:48 -0400 Received: by ik-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id c28so592879ika for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 06:12:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <470CC97F.4000906@trash.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 14:45 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: > OK, hrtimers are disabled on your system, but we still announce > the usec clock resolution to userspace, which is used by HTB to > calculate the burst rate. But actually that can't be the reason > since that has already been the case in 2.6.22. Please post a diff > of the bootlog from 2.6.22 and 2.6.23. Any possible relation to clock source? logs seem to indicate acpi source; how does tsc or jiffies do? BTW, I could be wrong about this, but iirc in a xeon i had access to i saw that i could not guarantee the same clock source would be selected across reboots in about 2.6.22. cheers, jamal