RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy

["Dan Magenheimer" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> I think apic=0 is not a particularly useful configuration 
> though, right?

We've seen it proposed sometimes as a workaround for
a boot-time problem, but I agree its not useful enough
to warrant concern or stand in the way of Dave's patch.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 1:34 AM
> To: dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx; Dave Winchell; xen-devel
> Cc: Ben Guthro
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy
> 
> 
> On 13/6/08 05:47, "Dan Magenheimer" 
> <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > I wondered what was different between apic=1 vs 0. Using:
> >
> > # cat /proc/interrupts | grep 'LOC|timer'; sleep 10; \
> >      cat /proc/interrupts | grep 'LOC|timer'
> >
> > you can see that there are always 1000 LOC/sec.  But
> > with apic=1 there are also about 350 IO-APIC-edge-timer/sec
> > and with apic=0 there are 1000 XT-PIC-timer/sec.
> >
> > I suspect that the latter of these (XT-PIC-timer) is
> > messing up your policy and the former (edge-timer) is not.
> 
> I think apic=0 is not a particularly useful configuration 
> though, right?
> 
>  -- Keir
> 
> 
>


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel