On Mon, 07 May 2007, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 12:58:15PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sat, 05 May 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > + printk(KERN_WARNING "HPET counter is defect\n");
> >
> > What about
> > printk(KERN_WARNING "HPET
Hi,
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 12:58:15PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sat, 05 May 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > + printk(KERN_WARNING "HPET counter is defect\n");
>
> What about
> printk(KERN_WARNING "HPET counter is stopped\n");
>
> which is far more
Hi,
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 12:58:15PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
+ printk(KERN_WARNING HPET counter is defect\n);
What about
printk(KERN_WARNING HPET counter is stopped\n);
which is far more descriptive?
On Mon, 07 May 2007, Andreas Mohr wrote:
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 12:58:15PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
+ printk(KERN_WARNING HPET counter is defect\n);
What about
printk(KERN_WARNING HPET counter is
The lspci output:
00:00.0 Host bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon Xpress 200 Host Bridge
(rev 01)
00:01.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RS480 PCI Bridge
00:12.0 SATA controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 Non-Raid-5 SATA
00:13.0 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI0)
On Saturday 05 May 2007 21:15:01 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 19:24 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > if (!is_hpet_capable())
> > > @@ -278,6 +279,14 @@ int __init hpet_enable(void)
> > > /* Start the counter */
> > > hpet_start_counter();
> > >
> > > + /* Verify whether
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 19:24 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > if (!is_hpet_capable())
> > @@ -278,6 +279,14 @@ int __init hpet_enable(void)
> > /* Start the counter */
> > hpet_start_counter();
> >
> > + /* Verify whether hpet counter works */
> > + t1 = hpet_read();
> > +
> if (!is_hpet_capable())
> @@ -278,6 +279,14 @@ int __init hpet_enable(void)
> /* Start the counter */
> hpet_start_counter();
>
> + /* Verify whether hpet counter works */
> + t1 = hpet_read();
> + udelay(50);
Are you sure udelay is calibrated at this point? I
On Sat, 05 May 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "HPET counter is defect\n");
What about
printk(KERN_WARNING "HPET counter is stopped\n");
which is far more descriptive?
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
Guilherme,
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 16:27 -0700, john stultz wrote:
> > Before going to hard to maintain DMI black lists we should first check
> > if it's a more general problem and can't it be solved better? Most likely
> > that system isn't the one with this issue and I don't want to apply
> >
Guilherme,
please discard the previous patch. I missed to refresh it before sending
it out. Correct version below.
tglx
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 16:26 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> can you please undo John's patch and check whether the patch below works
> for you.
Index:
Guilherme,
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 16:27 -0700, john stultz wrote:
Before going to hard to maintain DMI black lists we should first check
if it's a more general problem and can't it be solved better? Most likely
that system isn't the one with this issue and I don't want to apply
DMI
Guilherme,
please discard the previous patch. I missed to refresh it before sending
it out. Correct version below.
tglx
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 16:26 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
can you please undo John's patch and check whether the patch below works
for you.
Index:
On Sat, 05 May 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
+ printk(KERN_WARNING HPET counter is defect\n);
What about
printk(KERN_WARNING HPET counter is stopped\n);
which is far more descriptive?
--
One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them
if (!is_hpet_capable())
@@ -278,6 +279,14 @@ int __init hpet_enable(void)
/* Start the counter */
hpet_start_counter();
+ /* Verify whether hpet counter works */
+ t1 = hpet_read();
+ udelay(50);
Are you sure udelay is calibrated at this point? I didn't
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 19:24 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
if (!is_hpet_capable())
@@ -278,6 +279,14 @@ int __init hpet_enable(void)
/* Start the counter */
hpet_start_counter();
+ /* Verify whether hpet counter works */
+ t1 = hpet_read();
+ udelay(50);
Are you
On Saturday 05 May 2007 21:15:01 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 19:24 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
if (!is_hpet_capable())
@@ -278,6 +279,14 @@ int __init hpet_enable(void)
/* Start the counter */
hpet_start_counter();
+ /* Verify whether hpet counter works */
The lspci output:
00:00.0 Host bridge: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon Xpress 200 Host Bridge
(rev 01)
00:01.0 PCI bridge: ATI Technologies Inc RS480 PCI Bridge
00:12.0 SATA controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 Non-Raid-5 SATA
00:13.0 USB Controller: ATI Technologies Inc SB600 USB (OHCI0)
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 01:18 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Friday 04 May 2007 23:29:04 john stultz wrote:
> > One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
> > lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
> > using the HPET.
> >
> > In digging deeper,
On Friday 04 May 2007 23:44:08 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 04 May 2007 14:29:04 -0700
> john stultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
> > lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
> > using the HPET.
On Friday 04 May 2007 23:29:04 john stultz wrote:
> One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
> lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
> using the HPET.
>
> In digging deeper, we found the HPET is not actually incrementing on
> this system.
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 14:44 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 04 May 2007 14:29:04 -0700
> john stultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
> > lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
> > using the
On Fri, 04 May 2007 14:29:04 -0700
john stultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
> lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
> using the HPET.
>
> In digging deeper, we found the HPET is not actually
One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
using the HPET.
In digging deeper, we found the HPET is not actually incrementing on
this system. And in fact, the reason why this issue just cropped up was
One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
using the HPET.
In digging deeper, we found the HPET is not actually incrementing on
this system. And in fact, the reason why this issue just cropped up was
On Fri, 04 May 2007 14:29:04 -0700
john stultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
using the HPET.
In digging deeper, we found the HPET is not actually incrementing
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 14:44 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2007 14:29:04 -0700
john stultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
using the HPET.
On Friday 04 May 2007 23:29:04 john stultz wrote:
One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
using the HPET.
In digging deeper, we found the HPET is not actually incrementing on
this system. And
On Friday 04 May 2007 23:44:08 Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2007 14:29:04 -0700
john stultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
using the HPET.
In
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 01:18 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Friday 04 May 2007 23:29:04 john stultz wrote:
One of the 2.6.21 regressions was Guilherme's problem seeing his box
lock up when the system detected an unstable TSC and dropped back to
using the HPET.
In digging deeper, we found
30 matches
Mail list logo
