Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

Update: I tested 2.6.21-rc5 with the following settings # CONFIG_NO_HZ is not set CONFIG_HPET_TIMER=y CONFIG_HPET_EMULATE_RTC=y # CONFIG_HPET is not set 1. Without additional kernel options After systems comes out of suspend to ram, I observed the following behaviour (I used s2ram from consol

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 13:16 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Sorry, now I'm confused. > > > Could you pls list the full set of tests you want me to run, > > > and what information to collect from each of them? > > > > 1. Test: > > I suspect step 0

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

* Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry, now I'm confused. > > Could you pls list the full set of tests you want me to run, > > and what information to collect from each of them? > > 1. Test: I suspect step 0 would be use Linus' latest tree, ontop of -rc4: http://kernel.org/pub

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 12:25 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Sorry, now I'm confused. > Could you pls list the full set of tests you want me to run, > and what information to collect from each of them? 1. Test: add clocksource=acpi_pm to command line with your current kernel config. Check, whet

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

> Quoting Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2) > > On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 12:15 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > Quoting Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Subject: Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-r

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 12:15 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Quoting Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Subject: Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2) > > > > On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 10:57 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > &

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

> Quoting Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2) > > On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 10:57 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > Can you please test the following: > > > > > > Add "clocksource=acpi_p

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 10:57 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Can you please test the following: > > > > Add "clocksource=acpi_pm" to the kernel commandline. > > > > If this does not change anything, then disable CONFIG_HPET and retry. > > I have: > $ grep CONFIG_HPET .config > CONFIG_HPET_TI

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

> > - Without CONFIG_NO_HZ > > I last tested this with cd05a1f818073a623455a58e756c5b419fc98db9. > > After systems comes out of suspend to ram, I observed the following > > behaviour (I used s2ram from console): > > 1. The first disk access takes much longer than with 2.6.20 > > 2. System

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 09:11 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > I lost track of Michaels various nested problems. > > > > Michael can you please give a summary on _all_ entries in the > > regressions list against Linus latest ? > > I tested 2 different configurations on my T60: > - With CONFIG_N

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On 24/03/07, Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 2007-03-24 at 14:59 +0100, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > On 23/03/07, Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > Subject: soft lockup detected on CPU#0 > > > References

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Sat, 2007-03-24 at 14:59 +0100, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > On 23/03/07, Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > Subject: soft lockup detected on CPU#0 > > > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/3/152 > > > Submitter : Mi

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

Hi, On 23/03/07, Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Subject: soft lockup detected on CPU#0 > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/3/152 > Submitter : Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Handled-By : Thomas Gleixner <[EM

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

Emil, On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 20:22 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Subject: dynticks makes ksoftirqd1 use unreasonable amount of cpu time > > References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8100 > > Submitter : Emil Karlson <[EM

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 14:54 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, john stultz wrote: > > > > The incorrect clocksource selection is resolved w/ this patch: > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/22/287 > > > > There is still an issue of why the PIT clocksource hangs, but for the > > mom

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 23:43 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 18:23 -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote: > > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > >> Subject: gettimeofday increments too slowly > > >> References : http://bugzilla.kernel

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

Adrian Bunk wrote: >>> >> For the other issue raised there, clock running too slow, I now >> realize there is a similar report: >> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231626 > > It shouldn't be the same issue: > 2.6.20-1.2925.fc6 is based in 2.6.20.3-rc1 while this issue is a >

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 06:23:17PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote: > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > >> Subject: gettimeofday increments too slowly > >> References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8027 > >> Submitter : David L <[EMAIL P

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 18:23 -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote: > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > >> Subject: gettimeofday increments too slowly > >> References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8027 > >> Submitter : David L <[EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: >> Subject: gettimeofday increments too slowly >> References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8027 >> Submitter : David L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Caused-By : Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, john stultz wrote: > > The incorrect clocksource selection is resolved w/ this patch: > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/22/287 > > There is still an issue of why the PIT clocksource hangs, but for the > moment the issue its worked-around. Hmm.. I haven't seen it until now. Is

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > This email lists some known regressions in Linus' tree compared to 2.6.20. > > If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one > of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch > of you caused a

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Subject: soft lockup detected on CPU#0 > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/3/152 > Submitter : Michal Piotrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Handled-By : Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Subject: Dynticks and High resolution Timer hanging the system > workaround: clocksource=acpi_pm > References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/7/504 > Submitter : Stephane Casset <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Caused-By : Thomas Gleixne

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > This email lists some known regressions in Linus' tree compared to 2.6.20. > > If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one > of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch > of you caused a

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Subject: dynticks makes ksoftirqd1 use unreasonable amount of cpu time > References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8100 > Submitter : Emil Karlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Handled-By : Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Stat

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 08:15:38PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Subject: gettimeofday increments too slowly > > References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8027 > > Submitter : David L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Caused-By :

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 20:15 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Subject: gettimeofday increments too slowly > > References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8027 > > Submitter : David L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Caused-By : Thomas

Re: [4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 19:50 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Subject: gettimeofday increments too slowly > References : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8027 > Submitter : David L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Caused-By : Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > commit 92c7e00254b2d0ef

[4/5] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions (v2)

This email lists some known regressions in Linus' tree compared to 2.6.20. If you find your name in the Cc header, you are either submitter of one of the bugs, maintainer of an affectected subsystem or driver, a patch of you caused a breakage or I'm considering you in any other way possibly involv