Re: 2.6.1 "clock preempt"?

[john stultz <johnstul _at_ xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 11:36, timothy parkinson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 11:17:29AM -0800, john stultz wrote:
> > Well, lost ticks can be caused by many things, but your point is valid,
> > the message could be a bit more elightening. 
> 
> googling for this issue turns up quite a few questions about it - there's
> already one possible answer in the source, couldn't hurt to stick in a few
> more:
> 
> 
>       if (lost_count++ > 100) {
>               printk(KERN_WARNING "Losing too many ticks!\n");
>               printk(KERN_WARNING "TSC cannot be used as a timesource.\n"
>                     "Are you running with SpeedStep?\n"
> +                   "Perhaps you should enable DMA using \"hdparm\"?\n"
> +                   "etc..........)\n");
>               printk(KERN_WARNING "Falling back to a sane timesource.\n");
>               clock_fallback();
>       }
> 
> not that you have to actually listen to me or anything...  :-)

Looks good by me. Would you mind sending such a patch to Andrew?

thanks
-john


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/