Re: "clock timer configuration lost" on Serverworks chipset
> The 2.2.20-pre2 patch doesn't change time.c, and I don't see > this code in 2.4.4 or 2.4.5pre. its in 2.4.4-ac where Im testing the change > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: "clock timer configuration lost" on Serverworks chipset
I'm confused. The 2.2.19 time.c is already doing ">":
/* VIA686a test code... reset the latch if count > max */
if (count > LATCH-1) {
[adjust count and whine]
The 2.2.20-pre2 patch doesn't change time.c, and I don't see
this code in 2.4.4 or 2.4.5pre.
Are you saying the code should be doing the equivalent of
"(count > LATCH)", or is 2.2.19 correct and the whines I'm
seeing mean there really is a problem with the Serverworks
chipset?
Thanks,
jcastle
Alan Cox wrote:
>Jim Castleberry)wrote:
>> How well has the problem been nailed down? Could it be that it just
>> showed up first on VIA and the real cause (and fix) remains to be
>> discovered? Or does Serverworks somehow have an identical bug in
>> their chipset?
>
>There is a notional off by one in the check at least by the rules of the
>original chip which do allow the overflow value to be visible momentarily.
>Later -ac checks for > not >=
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: "clock timer configuration lost" on Serverworks chipset
> How well has the problem been nailed down? Could it be that it just > showed up first on VIA and the real cause (and fix) remains to be > discovered? Or does Serverworks somehow have an identical bug in > their chipset? There is a notional off by one in the check at least by the rules of the original chip which do allow the overflow value to be visible momentarily. Later -ac checks for > not >= - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
"clock timer configuration lost" on Serverworks chipset
I'm getting messages saying "clock timer configuration lost - probably a VIA686a" from 2.2.19 running on a board using the Serverworks HE chipset. Reading the list archives it sounds like this problem has previously been attributed to a possible bug in the VIA chipset. According to RedHat's bugzilla database, others have seen it on Serverworks chipsets, too. And it sounds like using "noapic" sometimes makes it go away, which doesn't make much sense to me. How well has the problem been nailed down? Could it be that it just showed up first on VIA and the real cause (and fix) remains to be discovered? Or does Serverworks somehow have an identical bug in their chipset? jcastle - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
