Continual reading from the PowerPc time base register is not stable
Csdncannon
csdncannon at gmail.com
Fri Mar 26 13:04:35 EST 2010
Ben
Attached is the previous failing one.
Thanks
Gino
2010/3/26 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh at kernel.crashing.org>
> On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 09:11 +0800, Csdncannon wrote:
> > After trying the new code with "isync" and unsigned long long
> > convertion, this problem doesn't happen(I tested for several minutes).
> > But the previous block of codes(lacking of isync) is borrowed from
> > kernel. And if this is a bug of kernel?
>
> There's an outstanding question about that. Some processors make mftb
> context synchronizing but it appears that it may not be the case for all
> of them.
>
> Thus indeed, we -might- need some isync's in some places, it's not
> totally clear to me though.
>
> Can you send the code that fails (without the isync) ? The one you sent
> did have them everywhere.
>
> Cheers,
> Ben.
>
> > Thanks
> > Gino
> >
> > 2010/3/26 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh at kernel.crashing.org>
> > On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 23:00 +0800, Csdncannon wrote:
> > > I am really sorry that the previously attached code is
> > wrong, this one
> > > "timebase.c" is the right one, and the "log_timebase" file
> > is the
> > > right log.
> > >
> > > We are using FreeScale PowerPc 8378, kernel 2.6.28 and
> > compiled as
> > > 32-bit.
> >
> >
> > And despite all those sync/isync you can still observe the
> > timebase
> > going backward ? That sounds scary. However, at this stage all
> > I can
> > suggest is getting freescale folks to have a look, as this
> > should really
> > not happen. Maybe there's some setting with that specific SoC
> > that is
> > missing or similar...
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ben.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Gino
> > >
> > > 2010/3/25 Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de>
> > > On Thursday 25 March 2010, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> > wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 10:41 +0800, Csdncannon
> > wrote:
> > > > > In my program, the value of the 64-bit
> > time base
> > > register is
> > > > > read out, and you will find the later value is
> > even
> > > smaller than the
> > > > > earlier value from the log “log_timebase”. While
> > the
> > > kernel depends on
> > > > > the accuracy of the timebase for the
> > compensation of the
> > > lost PIT
> > > > > interrupt, the negative value between two
> > continual
> > > timebase reading
> > > > > will bring to the jump of the jiffies. And this
> > timebase
> > > problem will
> > > > > bring to the instability of the gettimeofday
> > system call.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you have any idea about this
> > problem, thanks
> > > for your any
> > > > > advice. Attached is the code and log.
> > > >
> > > > This is a concern, it should definitely not
> > happen. What
> > > machine is
> > > > that ? is the code compiled 32-bit or 64-bit ?
> > What kernel
> > > version ?
> > > >
> > > > Arnd, any chance that could relate to the bug
> > you've been
> > > chasing on
> > > > Cell ?
> > >
> > >
> > > We're still busy with the problem analysis on Cell,
> > waiting
> > > for a time
> > > slot to run the next test kernel. So far it seems
> > like the
> > > timebase
> > > is actually synchronized at a significant accuracy
> > on QS22 to
> > > never
> > > cause this problem with correct code, however it is
> > possible
> > > to
> > > observe incorrect timebase values on Cell whenever
> > the mftb
> > > instruction
> > > is not serialized with memory accesses, e.g. by
> > using an isync
> > > in front
> > > of the mftb. On Power6 and other CPUs, that problem
> > will not
> > > happen.
> > >
> > > Arnd
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/attachments/20100326/58c6a6d7/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: timebase.c
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 1575 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/attachments/20100326/58c6a6d7/attachment-0001.obj>
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list