Motherboard: Intel DP55KG
BIOS: 3878P (latest as of 11/08/09)
When CPUFREQ is compiled in the kernel:
[ 3.374532] cpuidle: using governor ladder
[ 3.377935] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 3.377939] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c:390 hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80()
[ 3.377940] Hardware name:
[ 3.377941] Modules linked in:
[ 3.377942] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31.4 #18
[ 3.377943] Call Trace:
[ 3.377946] [<ffffffff81043180>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 3.377947] [<ffffffff81043180>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 3.377950] [<ffffffff810564d4>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x74/0xd0
[ 3.377952] [<ffffffff81043180>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 3.377954] [<ffffffff81076fd6>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x36/0xb0
[ 3.377956] [<ffffffff810769b9>] ? tick_broadcast_oneshot_control+0x119/0x120
[ 3.377957] [<ffffffff8107617d>] ? tick_notify+0x22d/0x420
[ 3.377960] [<ffffffff8106f737>] ? notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
[ 3.377961] [<ffffffff81075a6b>] ? clockevents_notify+0x2b/0x90
[ 3.377964] [<ffffffff812438a8>] ? acpi_idle_enter_bm+0x15f/0x2d3
[ 3.377966] [<ffffffff8124373e>] ? acpi_idle_enter_c1+0xf1/0xfc
[ 3.377969] [<ffffffff812e84ea>] ? cpuidle_idle_call+0xba/0x120
[ 3.377972] [<ffffffff8102b830>] ? cpu_idle+0x60/0xa0
[ 3.377975] ---[ end trace 222f8db6d7ba1b9b ]---
[ 3.883303] cpufreq-core: trying to register driver acpi-cpufreq
[ 3.883305] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 0
[ 3.883348] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
[ 3.883349] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 1
[ 3.883390] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
[ 3.883391] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 2
[ 3.883432] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
[ 3.883433] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 3
[ 3.883473] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
[ 3.883474] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 4
[ 3.883515] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
[ 3.883516] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 5
[ 3.883556] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
[ 3.883557] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 6
[ 3.883598] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
[ 3.883599] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 7
[ 3.883639] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
[ 3.883640] cpufreq-core: no CPU initialized for driver acpi-cpufreq
Justin.
On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 09:35:33AM -0500, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> Motherboard: Intel DP55KG
> BIOS: 3878P (latest as of 11/08/09)
>
> When CPUFREQ is compiled in the kernel:
>
> [ 3.377946] [<ffffffff81043180>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
> [ 3.377947] [<ffffffff81043180>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
> [ 3.377950] [<ffffffff810564d4>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x74/0xd0
> [ 3.377952] [<ffffffff81043180>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
> [ 3.377954] [<ffffffff81076fd6>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x36/0xb0
> [ 3.377956] [<ffffffff810769b9>] ? tick_broadcast_oneshot_control+0x119/0x120
> [ 3.377957] [<ffffffff8107617d>] ? tick_notify+0x22d/0x420
> [ 3.377960] [<ffffffff8106f737>] ? notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
> [ 3.377961] [<ffffffff81075a6b>] ? clockevents_notify+0x2b/0x90
> [ 3.377964] [<ffffffff812438a8>] ? acpi_idle_enter_bm+0x15f/0x2d3
> [ 3.377966] [<ffffffff8124373e>] ? acpi_idle_enter_c1+0xf1/0xfc
> [ 3.377969] [<ffffffff812e84ea>] ? cpuidle_idle_call+0xba/0x120
> [ 3.377972] [<ffffffff8102b830>] ? cpu_idle+0x60/0xa0
> [ 3.377975] ---[ end trace 222f8db6d7ba1b9b ]---
This also happens if cpufreq is a module ?
There's no cpufreq code in that trace, so I'm puzzled.
> [ 3.883303] cpufreq-core: trying to register driver acpi-cpufreq
> [ 3.883305] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 0
> [ 3.883348] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
> [ 3.883349] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 1
> [ 3.883390] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
> [ 3.883391] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 2
> [ 3.883432] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
> [ 3.883433] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 3
> [ 3.883473] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
> [ 3.883474] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 4
> [ 3.883515] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
> [ 3.883516] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 5
> [ 3.883556] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
> [ 3.883557] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 6
> [ 3.883598] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
> [ 3.883599] cpufreq-core: adding CPU 7
> [ 3.883639] cpufreq-core: initialization failed
> [ 3.883640] cpufreq-core: no CPU initialized for driver acpi-cpufreq
Does acpi-cpufreq work when built as a module ?
If it does, seeing the differences in output from booting with cpufreq.debug=7
might yield some clues.
Dave
Hi,
> This also happens if cpufreq is a module ?
> There's no cpufreq code in that trace, so I'm puzzled.
It is not possible(?) to have CPUFREQ modularized:
| | [*] CPU Frequency scaling
The ACPI_FREQ option can be though and it happens with or without it being
a module.
| | <M> ACPI Processor P-States driver
(the first part)
The second part is because I had compiled all of the power options in
CPU_FREQ into the kernel, when I only copied w/ the ACPI processor
P-States driver, I no longer got the errors that I originally reported
(cpufreq-core).
The following error still occurs though, I found the offending kernel
option(s):
> CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR=y
> CONFIG_ACPI_THERMAL=y
When this option is set, I get this:
[ 3.478541] usb 2-1: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice
[ 3.491263] hub 2-1:1.0: USB hub found
[ 3.503731] hub 2-1:1.0: 8 ports detected
[ 3.524227] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 3.536449] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c:390 hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80()
[ 3.548886] Hardware name:
[ 3.561191] Modules linked in:
[ 3.573404] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31.5 #12
[ 3.585755] Call Trace:
[ 3.597989] [<ffffffff81043180>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 3.610401] [<ffffffff81043180>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 3.622758] [<ffffffff810569a4>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x74/0xd0
[ 3.635040] [<ffffffff81043180>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 3.647281] [<ffffffff81077916>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x36/0xb0
[ 3.659534] [<ffffffff810772f9>] ? tick_broadcast_oneshot_control+0x119/0x120
[ 3.671816] [<ffffffff81076abd>] ? tick_notify+0x22d/0x420
[ 3.683947] [<ffffffff810700b7>] ? notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
[ 3.696066] [<ffffffff810763ab>] ? clockevents_notify+0x2b/0x90
[ 3.708096] [<ffffffff81244ac8>] ? acpi_idle_enter_bm+0x15f/0x2d3
[ 3.720113] [<ffffffff8124495e>] ? acpi_idle_enter_c1+0xf1/0xfc
[ 3.732057] [<ffffffff812e7a9a>] ? cpuidle_idle_call+0xba/0x120
[ 3.743996] [<ffffffff8102b832>] ? cpu_idle+0x62/0xc0
[ 3.755860] ---[ end trace 747bb91afa915135 ]---
[ 3.973002] usb 4-1: new low speed USB device using uhci_hcd and address 2
[ 4.209390] usb 4-1: New USB device found, idVendor=051d, idProduct=0002
[ 4.221469] usb 4-1: New USB device strings: Mfr=3, Product=1, SerialNumber=2
> Does acpi-cpufreq work when built as a module ?
> If it does, seeing the differences in output from booting with cpufreq.debug=7
> might yield some clues.
When the option is not set, dmesg is normal, no problems (but then, I cannot
run ACPI_FREQ) to achieve turbo mode on my CPU (the ACPI_FREQ driver
requires the PROCESSOR option to be enabled).
So your next question, does that error occur when processor.ko is a
module? Yes:
[ 6.331411] processor LNXCPU:00: registered as cooling_device0
[ 6.340372] e1000e: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - 1.0.15-NAPI
[ 6.340373] e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2009 Intel Corporation.
[ 6.340402] e1000e 0000:00:19.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 20 (level, low) -> IRQ 20
[ 6.340411] e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64
[ 6.397934] ACPI: Processor [CPU0] (supports
[ 6.398080] e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 38 for MSI/MSI-X
[ 6.414813] 8 throttling states)
[ 6.432030] ACPI: CPU1 (power states: C1[C1] C3[C3])
[ 6.448937] processor LNXCPU:01: registered as cooling_device1
[ 6.465770] ACPI: Processor [CPU1] (supports 8 throttling states)
[ 6.483179] ACPI: CPU2 (power states: C1[C1] C3[C3])
[ 6.499971] processor LNXCPU:02: registered as cooling_device2
[ 6.516762] ACPI: Processor [CPU2] (supports 8 throttling states)
[ 6.534255] ACPI: CPU3 (power states: C1[C1] C3[C3])
[ 6.551147] processor LNXCPU:03: registered as cooling_device3
[ 6.568112] ACPI: Processor [CPU3] (supports 8 throttling states)
[ 6.609973] ACPI: CPU4 (power states: C1[C1] C3[C3])
[ 6.627180] processor LNXCPU:04: registered as cooling_device4
[ 6.644334] ACPI: Processor [CPU4] (supports 8 throttling states)
[ 6.662005] ACPI: CPU5 (power states: C1[C1] C3[C3])
[ 6.679323] processor LNXCPU:05: registered as cooling_device5
[ 6.696652] ACPI: Processor [CPU5] (supports 8 throttling states)
[ 6.714578] ACPI: CPU6 (power states: C1[C1] C3[C3])
[ 6.716148] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 6.716153] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c:390 hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80()
[ 6.716154] Hardware name:
[ 6.716155] Modules linked in: e1000e(+) thermal processor(+)
[ 6.716158] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31.5 #15
[ 6.716159] Call Trace:
[ 6.716161] [<ffffffff81042090>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 6.716163] [<ffffffff81042090>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 6.716166] [<ffffffff810558b4>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x74/0xd0
[ 6.716168] [<ffffffff81042090>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 6.716170] [<ffffffff81076826>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x36/0xb0
[ 6.716172] [<ffffffff81076209>] ? tick_broadcast_oneshot_control+0x119/0x120
[ 6.716174] [<ffffffff810759cd>] ? tick_notify+0x22d/0x420
[ 6.716176] [<ffffffff8106efc7>] ? notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
[ 6.716178] [<ffffffff810752bb>] ? clockevents_notify+0x2b/0x90
[ 6.716182] [<ffffffffa00022a0>] ? acpi_idle_enter_bm+0x15f/0x2d3 [processor]
[ 6.716185] [<ffffffffa0002136>] ? acpi_idle_enter_c1+0xf1/0xfc [processor]
[ 6.716188] [<ffffffff812de4fa>] ? cpuidle_idle_call+0xba/0x120
[ 6.716191] [<ffffffff8102b7f2>] ? cpu_idle+0x62/0xc0
[ 6.716192] ---[ end trace dc2616d16ddbce62 ]---
[ 6.852167] 0000:00:19.0: eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x1) 00:1c:c0:f6:b6:50
[ 6.852169] 0000:00:19.0: eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
[ 6.852244] 0000:00:19.0: eth0: MAC: 10, PHY: 9, PBA No: ffffff-0ff
[ 6.852320] e1000e 0000:04:00.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 16 (level, low) -> IRQ 16
[ 6.852334] e1000e 0000:04:00.0: setting latency timer to 64
[ 7.115593] processor LNXCPU:06: registered as cooling_device6
[ 7.115992] e1000e 0000:04:00.0: irq 39 for MSI/MSI-X
[ 7.115994] e1000e 0000:04:00.0: irq 40 for MSI/MSI-X
[ 7.131290] ACPI: Processor [CPU6] (supports 8 throttling states)
[ 7.147607] ACPI: CPU7 (power states: C1[C1] C3[C3])
[ 7.163485] processor LNXCPU:07: registered as cooling_device7
[ 7.179105] ACPI: Processor [CPU7] (supports 8 throttling states)
Justin.
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> Hi,
Any other clues/things to try to find out why this is happening?
Here is the dmesg from Phoronix but they are using an i750 not an i870,
the only differences that I can note are below:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_p55&num=3
Phoronix:
[ 0.468994] hpet0: at MMIO 0xfed00000, IRQs 2, 8, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 0
[ 0.468999] hpet0: 8 comparators, 64-bit 14.318180 MHz counter
[ 0.472841] hpet: hpet2 irq 24 for MSI
[ 0.473257] hpet: hpet3 irq 25 for MSI
[ 0.477260] hpet: hpet4 irq 26 for MSI
[ 0.481251] hpet: hpet5 irq 27 for MSI
My host:
[ 0.656054] hpet0: at MMIO 0xfed00000, IRQs 2, 8, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 0
[ 0.656060] hpet0: 8 comparators, 64-bit 14.318180 MHz counter
[ 0.659020] hpet: hpet2 irq 24 for MSI
[ 0.659253] hpet: hpet3 irq 25 for MSI
[ 0.659993] hpet: hpet4 irq 26 for MSI
[ 0.660317] hpet: hpet5 irq 27 for MSI
[ 0.661001] hpet: hpet6 irq 28 for MSI
Much of their dmesg is the same as mine with the exception of the of the
problem I am reporting, what is the best way to debug this problem
further?
Perhaps the Phoronix configuration does not have processor loaded in the
kernel or as a module?
Again, the problem:
[ 3.318770] cpuidle: using governor ladder
[ 3.321556] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 3.321560] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c:390 hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80()
[ 3.321561] Hardware name:
[ 3.321562] Modules linked in:
[ 3.321564] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31.5 #17
[ 3.321565] Call Trace:
[ 3.321567] [<ffffffff81042f00>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 3.321568] [<ffffffff81042f00>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 3.321571] [<ffffffff81056724>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x74/0xd0
[ 3.321573] [<ffffffff81042f00>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
[ 3.321576] [<ffffffff81077696>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x36/0xb0
[ 3.321578] [<ffffffff81077079>] ? tick_broadcast_oneshot_control+0x119/0x120
[ 3.321579] [<ffffffff8107683d>] ? tick_notify+0x22d/0x420
[ 3.321581] [<ffffffff8106fe37>] ? notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
[ 3.321583] [<ffffffff8107612b>] ? clockevents_notify+0x2b/0x90
[ 3.321586] [<ffffffff81244848>] ? acpi_idle_enter_bm+0x15f/0x2d3
[ 3.321587] [<ffffffff812446de>] ? acpi_idle_enter_c1+0xf1/0xfc
[ 3.321590] [<ffffffff812e6d7a>] ? cpuidle_idle_call+0xba/0x120
[ 3.321593] [<ffffffff8102b832>] ? cpu_idle+0x62/0xc0
[ 3.321596] ---[ end trace cac202f11005305c ]---
[ 3.553852] cpuidle: using governor menu
Justin.
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>
>> Hi,
> Again, the problem:
> [ 3.318770] cpuidle: using governor ladder
> [ 3.321556] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 3.321560] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c:390
> hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80()
> [ 3.321561] Hardware name:
> [ 3.321562] Modules linked in:
> [ 3.321564] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31.5 #17
> [ 3.321565] Call Trace:
> [ 3.321567] [<ffffffff81042f00>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
> [ 3.321568] [<ffffffff81042f00>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
> [ 3.321571] [<ffffffff81056724>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x74/0xd0
> [ 3.321573] [<ffffffff81042f00>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
> [ 3.321576] [<ffffffff81077696>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x36/0xb0
> [ 3.321578] [<ffffffff81077079>] ?
> tick_broadcast_oneshot_control+0x119/0x120
> [ 3.321579] [<ffffffff8107683d>] ? tick_notify+0x22d/0x420
> [ 3.321581] [<ffffffff8106fe37>] ? notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
> [ 3.321583] [<ffffffff8107612b>] ? clockevents_notify+0x2b/0x90
> [ 3.321586] [<ffffffff81244848>] ? acpi_idle_enter_bm+0x15f/0x2d3
> [ 3.321587] [<ffffffff812446de>] ? acpi_idle_enter_c1+0xf1/0xfc
> [ 3.321590] [<ffffffff812e6d7a>] ? cpuidle_idle_call+0xba/0x120
> [ 3.321593] [<ffffffff8102b832>] ? cpu_idle+0x62/0xc0
> [ 3.321596] ---[ end trace cac202f11005305c ]---
> [ 3.553852] cpuidle: using governor menu
Other user with this problem:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/2/330 - Nobody responded to his report.
This has been also been reported on other forums with no fix / conclusion on
any type of fix or work-around.
Justin.
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>
>> Again, the problem:
>> [ 3.318770] cpuidle: using governor ladder
>> [ 3.321556] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>> [ 3.321560] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c:390
>> hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80()
>> [ 3.321561] Hardware name:
>> [ 3.321562] Modules linked in:
>> [ 3.321564] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31.5 #17
>> [ 3.321565] Call Trace:
>> [ 3.321567] [<ffffffff81042f00>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
>> [ 3.321568] [<ffffffff81042f00>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
>> [ 3.321571] [<ffffffff81056724>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x74/0xd0
>> [ 3.321573] [<ffffffff81042f00>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
>> [ 3.321576] [<ffffffff81077696>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x36/0xb0
>> [ 3.321578] [<ffffffff81077079>] ?
>> tick_broadcast_oneshot_control+0x119/0x120
>> [ 3.321579] [<ffffffff8107683d>] ? tick_notify+0x22d/0x420
>> [ 3.321581] [<ffffffff8106fe37>] ? notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
>> [ 3.321583] [<ffffffff8107612b>] ? clockevents_notify+0x2b/0x90
>> [ 3.321586] [<ffffffff81244848>] ? acpi_idle_enter_bm+0x15f/0x2d3
>> [ 3.321587] [<ffffffff812446de>] ? acpi_idle_enter_c1+0xf1/0xfc
>> [ 3.321590] [<ffffffff812e6d7a>] ? cpuidle_idle_call+0xba/0x120
>> [ 3.321593] [<ffffffff8102b832>] ? cpu_idle+0x62/0xc0
>> [ 3.321596] ---[ end trace cac202f11005305c ]---
>> [ 3.553852] cpuidle: using governor menu
>
> Other user with this problem:
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/2/330 - Nobody responded to his report.
>
> This has been also been reported on other forums with no fix / conclusion on
> any type of fix or work-around.
>
> Justin.
>
>
Someone sent me a patch off-list which prints out what hpet is doing:
Hi,
Unfortunately I cannot login fast enough to get a full dmesg:
It continually scrolls with this:
[ 11.463500] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0x9c90955 != 0xa0e8b7b
[ 11.463972] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0xa0e8b7b != 0x9cb9398
[ 11.475121] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0x9cb9398 != 0xa0e8b71
[ 11.475144] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0xa0e8b71 != 0x9ce0459
[ 11.486274] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0x9ce0459 != 0xa0e8b61
[ 11.486343] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0xa0e8b61 != 0x9d076c0
[ 11.497492] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0x9d076c0 != 0xa0e8b4c
[ 11.497962] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0xa0e8b4c != 0x9d30119
[ 11.509111] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0x9d30119 != 0xa0e8b3c
[ 11.509134] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0xa0e8b3c != 0x9d571a9
[ 11.520275] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0x9d571a9 != 0xa0e8b2f
[ 11.520293] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0xa0e8b2f != 0x9d7e24d
[ 11.531443] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0x9d7e24d != 0xa0e8b1d
[ 11.531947] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0xa0e8b1d != 0x9da6e46
[ 11.543095] hpet_next_event: hpet_writel failed: 0x9da6e46 != 0xa0e8b0c
When I do not load processor.ko though, the error does not occur.
Something is wrong with processor.ko that screws up hpet.
With the patch applied and processor.ko removed from the kernel:
$ dmesg | grep -i hpet
[ 0.000000] ACPI: HPET 00000000cf7f3000 00038 (v01 INTEL KBIBX10J 00000F26 MSFT 0100000D)
[ 0.000000] ACPI: HPET id: 0x8086a701 base: 0xfed00000
[ 0.000232] hpet clockevent registered
[ 0.000246] HPET: 8 timers in total, 5 timers will be used for per-cpu timer
[ 0.655058] hpet0: at MMIO 0xfed00000, IRQs 2, 8, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 0
[ 0.655064] hpet0: 8 comparators, 64-bit 14.318180 MHz counter
[ 0.658023] hpet: hpet2 irq 24 for MSI
[ 0.658247] hpet: hpet3 irq 25 for MSI
[ 0.658994] hpet: hpet4 irq 26 for MSI
[ 0.659328] hpet: hpet5 irq 27 for MSI
[ 0.660007] hpet: hpet6 irq 28 for MSI
[ 3.014543] rtc0: alarms up to one month, y3k, 114 bytes nvram, hpet irqs
No issues.
Also, when the kernel is spewing those failed writes for HPET, I bet that is
what is responsible for the high pitch noise as well, using a kernel without
the processor module and no hpet_write failures, there is no high pitch noise.
What is going on here?
Has hpet+ACPI/processor.ko been tested with the P55 chipset?
Justin.