[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: xen 4.14.3 incorrect (~3x) cpu frequency reported
On 06.01.2022 16:08, James Dingwall wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 12:59:11PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> >>>> On 21.07.2021 11:29, James Dingwall wrote: >>>> >>>>> We have a system which intermittently starts up and reports an incorrect >>>>> cpu frequency: > ... >>> I'm sorry to ask, but have you got around to actually doing that? Or >>> else is resolving this no longer of interest? > > We have experienced an occurence of this issue on 4.14.3 with 'loglvl=all' > present on the xen command line. I have attached the 'xl dmesg' output for > the fast MHz boot, the diff from the normal case is small so I've not added > that log separately: > > --- normal-mhz/xl-dmesg.txt 2022-01-06 14:13:47.231465234 +0000 > +++ funny-mhz/xl-dmesg.txt 2022-01-06 13:45:43.825148510 +0000 > @@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ > (XEN) cap enforcement granularity: 10ms > (XEN) load tracking window length 1073741824 ns > (XEN) Platform timer is 24.000MHz HPET > -(XEN) Detected 2294.639 MHz processor. > +(XEN) Detected 7623.412 MHz processor. > (XEN) EFI memory map: > (XEN) 0000000000000-0000000007fff type=3 attr=000000000000000f > (XEN) 0000000008000-000000003cfff type=7 attr=000000000000000f > @@ -616,6 +616,7 @@ > (XEN) PCI add device 0000:b7:00.1 > (XEN) PCI add device 0000:b7:00.2 > (XEN) PCI add device 0000:b7:00.3 > +(XEN) Platform timer appears to have unexpectedly wrapped 10 or more times. > (XEN) [VT-D]d0:PCIe: unmap 0000:65:00.2 > (XEN) [VT-D]d32753:PCIe: map 0000:65:00.2 > (XEN) [VT-D]d0:PCIe: unmap 0000:65:00.1 Thanks. In an earlier mail the reported value was 6895.384 MHz, but I guess that was on a different system (with a base freq of 2200 MHz). I wonder how stable the too high value is ... For the moment I have only one possibly explanation: A SMI hitting in the middle of the tail of init_hpet() (or init_pmtimer()), taking long enough to cause the function to return way too large a number. With a 50ms calibration period that would be about 166ms. I vaguely recall having heard of SMI potentially taking this long. While I can see ways to reduce the likelihood of hitting the issue, for now I lack a good idea how to avoid the problem altogether. I'll try to get around to at least put together a debugging patch to hopefully confirm the vague theory. Jan > I also have the dom0 kernel dmesg available if that would be useful but I've > left it off initially because the log is quite large. I don't see much in > the diff between boots except where speed/times are reported and where things > are initialised in a slightly different order. > > Thanks, > James
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |