Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755062AbXLHPeh (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Dec 2007 10:34:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751848AbXLHPe2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Dec 2007 10:34:28 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:37506 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751462AbXLHPe1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Dec 2007 10:34:27 -0500 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 16:33:27 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Michael Buesch Cc: Mark Lord , Guillaume Chazarain , stefano.brivio@polimi.it, Nick Piggin , Robert Love , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Jones , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , Len Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] scheduler: fix x86 regression in native_sched_clock Message-ID: <20071208153327.GC30270@elte.hu> References: <20071207084559.GA11162@elte.hu> <475AB2FD.30600@rtr.ca> <20071208151341.GA25413@elte.hu> <200712081627.45937.mb@bu3sch.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200712081627.45937.mb@bu3sch.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1503 Lines: 45 * Michael Buesch wrote: > On Saturday 08 December 2007 16:13:41 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Mark Lord wrote: > > > > > Ingo Molnar wrote: > > >> ... > > >> thanks. I do get the impression that most of this can/should wait until > > >> 2.6.25. The patches look quite dangerous. > > > .. > > > > > > I confess to not really trying hard to understand everything in this > > > thread, but the implication seems to be that this bug might affect > > > udelay() and possibly jiffies ? > > > > no, it cannot affect jiffies. (jiffies was a red herring all along) > > > > udelay() cannot be affected either - sched_clock() has no effect on > > udelay(). _But_, when there are TSC problems then tsc based udelay() > > suffers too so the phenomenons may _seem_ related. > > What about msleep()? I suspect problems in b43 because of this issue. > msleep() returning too early. Is that possible with this bug? i cannot see how. You can verify msleep by running something like this: while :; do time usleep 111000; done you should see a steady stream of: real 0m0.113s real 0m0.113s real 0m0.113s (on an idle system). If it fluctuates, with occasional longer delays, there's some timer problem present. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/