Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-11 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > > > [...] Soeren, can you confirm that you are using a !CONFIG_SMP kernel, > > > > and if yes, does the patch below fix the resume problem for you? > > > > > > hm, you seem to have a CONFIG_SMP=y kernel. I dont immediately see where > > > we re-enable interrupts in the SMP case, but cou

Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-07 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 11:47 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Rafael J. Wysocki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > We do in on_each_cpu() unconditionally. I missed that. > > > > BTW, the on_each_cpu() in clock_was_set() is unnecessary, because > > timekeeping_resume() is always run on one CPU. > >

Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-07 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday, 7 April 2007 11:47, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Rafael J. Wysocki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > We do in on_each_cpu() unconditionally. I missed that. > > > > BTW, the on_each_cpu() in clock_was_set() is unnecessary, because > > timekeeping_resume() is always run on one CPU. > >

Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-07 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Rafael J. Wysocki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We do in on_each_cpu() unconditionally. I missed that. > > BTW, the on_each_cpu() in clock_was_set() is unnecessary, because > timekeeping_resume() is always run on one CPU. yes - but that's not the only place where we do clock_was_set(), and

Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-07 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday, 7 April 2007 10:48, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 10:25 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > [...] Soeren, can you confirm that you are using a !CONFIG_SMP kernel, > > > and if yes, does the patch below fix the resume probl

Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-07 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 10:12 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > Subject: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix > From: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Soeren Sonnenburg reported that upon resume he is getting > this backtrace: > > [] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x57/0x90

Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-07 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 10:25 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > [...] Soeren, can you confirm that you are using a !CONFIG_SMP kernel, > > > and if yes, does the patch below fix the resume problem for yo

Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-07 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 10:25 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > [...] Soeren, can you confirm that you are using a !CONFIG_SMP kernel, > > and if yes, does the patch below fix the resume problem for you? > > hm, you seem to have a CONFIG_SMP=y kernel. I don

Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-07 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] Soeren, can you confirm that you are using a !CONFIG_SMP kernel, > and if yes, does the patch below fix the resume problem for you? hm, you seem to have a CONFIG_SMP=y kernel. I dont immediately see where we re-enable interrupts in the SMP case,

[patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

2007-04-07 Thread Ingo Molnar
et() but retrigger_next_event() for the current CPU. The patch below should fix it. Soeren, can you confirm that you are using a !CONFIG_SMP kernel, and if yes, does the patch below fix the resume problem for you? Ingo > Subject: [patch] high-res timers: