Re: [Regression] d96ac6f2: time: Revert ALWAYS_USE_PERSISTENT_CLOCK compile time optimizaitons

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

 



On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 05:16:49PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 05/31/2013 04:42 PM, Jens Taprogge wrote:
> >On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 02:14:47PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >>On 05/31/2013 05:06 AM, Jens Taprogge wrote:
> >>>So, in the case of the reverted v3.9.4 with CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT=y,
> >>>CONFIG_X86_VERBOSE_BOOTUP makes a difference.  To update the little
> >>>table from above:
> >>>
> >>>With d96ac6f2 reverted:
> >>>
> >>>   CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT=n works
> >>>   CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT=y and CONFIG_X86_VERBOSE_BOOTUP=y does not work
> >>>   CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_STAT=y and CONFIG_X86_VERBOSE_BOOTUP=n works
> >>Ok. None of this is yet making any sense to me. (And I worry
> >>enumerating all the mix and match of configs that work or don't only
> >>blurs the issues).
> >>
> >>Few base questions:
> >>1) What distro is this on?
> >arch linux
> >
> >>2) What gcc version are you using?
> >gcc (GCC) 4.8.0 20130502 (prerelease)
> 
> (Sorry, I'm not very familiar with arch) Are you able to also
> install a 4.7 gcc in parallel to try to build with?
> 
> If so, you might want to try that. Your results are just weird
> enough I want to just be sure we're not chasing compiler caused
> ghosts.

I will compile gcc4.6 and see if using that makes any difference.

> 
> >>3) Apply persistent-clock-exists-true.patch, does it boot or hang?
> >>
> >>4) Apply has-persistent-clock-true.patch (on top of
> >>persistent-clock-exists-true.patch), does it boot or hang?
> >Either patch alone or both combined boot.  From quick testin they seem
> >to follow the same pattern as the reverted version.
> 
> Hrmm.. That's strange too. I was guessing the first patch wouldn't
> boot, but maybe that's a helpful clue.
> 
> Attached is another patch that just provides debug info.
> 
> If you'd apply it (jdb.patch) against v3.9.4 with no other
> modifications, to verify that still doesn't boot.

This does not boot.

> 
> Then apply just persistent-clock-exists-true.patch, which should
> boot, and send me the output of:
>     $ dmesg | grep JDB

This does not boot either.  Applying both patches in addition to the new
one leads to a kernel that boots.  I double checked and
persistent-clock-exists-true.patch by itself still boots.

The output with all three patches applied is:

[    0.000000] JDB: efi_runtime_init() done
[    0.000000] JDB: mach_get_cmos_time: 1370098547
[    0.000000] JDB: timekeeping_init: Persistent clock time: 1370098547:0

> 
> 
> Thanks so much again for all the testing and help hunting this down!
> Sorry for the trouble!
> -john

No worries.

-jens

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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]