Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13: IO APIC breakage on HP nx6325

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



* Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  As expressed before, unfortunately a lot of diagnostic APIC messages 
> have been disabled in the 64-bit variation.  The result is I was 
> unable to get good results from my Internet search for bootstrap logs 
> from other systems using this southbridge.  Fortunately at least ACPI 
> messages are present and what I noticed is some of the systems do not 
> provide an IRQ0 override and still work correctly. [...]

okay, so when those files are unified, the diagnostics should remain and 
be prominent. (or even be put back into the 64-bit version right now.)

> > does PIT programming matter? One detail which might matter and which 
> > touches IRQ0 generation is the clockevent driver on nohz/highres. See 
> > arch/x86/kernel/i8253.c:init_pit_timer():
> > 
> >         case CLOCK_EVT_MODE_SHUTDOWN:
> >         case CLOCK_EVT_MODE_UNUSED:
> >                 if (evt->mode == CLOCK_EVT_MODE_PERIODIC ||
> >                     evt->mode == CLOCK_EVT_MODE_ONESHOT) {
> >                         outb_pit(0x30, PIT_MODE);
> >                         outb_pit(0, PIT_CH0);
> >                         outb_pit(0, PIT_CH0);
> >                 }
> >                 pit_disable_clocksource();
> >                 break;
> > 
> >         case CLOCK_EVT_MODE_ONESHOT:
> >                 /* One shot setup */
> >                 pit_disable_clocksource();
> >                 outb_pit(0x38, PIT_MODE);
> >                 break;
> 
>  It does, though not necessarily in this case.  In principle all this 
> 8254-through-APIC timer validation code assumes the source retriggers 
> automatically and if an edge is lost because the APIC input targeted 
> is masked or not configured yet, another one will follow shortly by 
> itself.  It used to be the case when this code was implemented as we 
> never used any of the single-shot modes of the 8254 back then.
> 
>  Is it now possible at the time check_timer() is called the 8254 has 
> been put in one of the single-shot modes?  If so, then additional code 
> has to be put in place either to switch the timer into the periodic 
> mode for the duration of check_timer() or to rearm the timer if in a 
> single-shot mode each time timer_irq_works() is called.

that's a question for Thomas i guess, he wrote the PIT single-shot code.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux