Daniel, On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 07:34:44AM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 02:12 -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote: > > Daniel, > > > > On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 04:07:54PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > On Mon, 2007-08-27 at 15:55 -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote: > > > > > > > Yet the model name looks strange. So we need to run one more test, > > > > as the fam/model is not enough. What we need to check is whether or > > > > not this processor implements architectural perfmon or not. > > > > > > > > Could you please compile and run the attached program and send me > > > > the output? > > > > > > The output below is all the output .. > > > > > > eax=0x7280201: version=1 num_cnt=2 > > > > > Then you have a Core Duo processor and the commit from Bjorn should > > fix the problem. If it does not, then there is something else wrong. > > Unfortunately, I do not have a Core Duo machine to try and reproduce. > > There must be something else wrong, cause the problem persists .. As I > said in past emails to Bjorn, I tested his commit in git, as well as the > latest git all with the same issue (as well as bisecting git).. > > If the hardware is buggy then we need some way to determine that.. > Could you instrument check_nmi_watchdog() to verify that you terminate this function? Normally there is a safety mechanism in there.
Another possibility is that you get flooded with NMI interrupts and do not make forward progress. > If this machine didn't support performance counters, what would happen > then? > If you have an Local APIC and performance counters, then it will try and use it. Otherwise, I suspect it tries the NMI_IO_APIC (nmi_watchdog=1). -- -Stephane - 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/
