Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756060AbYANLS1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 06:18:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754253AbYANLSP (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 06:18:15 -0500 Received: from ns.firmix.at ([62.141.48.66]:4152 "EHLO ns.firmix.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751958AbYANLSO (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 06:18:14 -0500 Subject: Re: The ext3 way of journalling From: Bernd Petrovitsch To: Tuomo Valkonen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080114111158.GB29126@jolt.modeemi.cs.tut.fi> References: <20080110131659.GF10230@mit.edu> <20080110134111.GA6254@jolt.modeemi.cs.tut.fi> <20080112150621.GC6751@mit.edu> <20080113221301.GA18341@jolt.modeemi.cs.tut.fi> <20080113222310.GA20815@jolt.modeemi.cs.tut.fi> <20080113231150.GB23906@mit.edu> <20080114071555.GA6475@jolt.modeemi.cs.tut.fi> <1200303743.24517.6.camel@tara.firmix.at> <1200304629.24517.15.camel@tara.firmix.at> <20080114111158.GB29126@jolt.modeemi.cs.tut.fi> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Firmix Software GmbH Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:18:06 +0100 Message-Id: <1200309486.24517.28.camel@tara.firmix.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.3 (2.8.3-2.fc6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Firmix-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on ns.firmix.at X-Firmix-Spam-Score: -2.334 () AWL,BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Firmix-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.334 required=5 X-Spam-Score: -2.334 () AWL,BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Firmix-Envelope-From: X-Firmix-Envelope-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1611 Lines: 38 On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 13:11 +0200, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: > On 2008-01-14 10:57 +0100, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > > That leads to the question why the clock starts to run like crazy at > > some time so that `ntpd` can't cope with it. > > I do wonder whether the PSU could've been causing it. Now that think We have some embedded systems where some strange problems[0] were caused by bad/cheap/low-quality PSUs. > about it, I got the PSU around two years ago, just like I compiled > 2.6.14. This PSU coincidentally seems to have been the cause of the > crash that started this thread, and went completely silent during > the same day, on the third crash. But even if the PSU could cause > the timer interrupt to signal too frequently or so, doesn't explain > why nearly always after a crash (when journal recovery would be the > normal course of action), fsck starts checking with absurd intervals > since last check, whereas there's no trouble booting after normal > shutdown. But for normal PCs, I don't know how much the quality of a PSU is relevant for the speed of the clock. Can you test with a different PSU? Bernd [0]: I don't know more details out of the top of my head. -- Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/ mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55 Embedded Linux Development and Services -- 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/