From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 20 21:04:32 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5434EA5B; Sat, 20 Sep 2014 21:04:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.bein.link (bein.link [37.252.124.82]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1284EACB; Sat, 20 Sep 2014 21:04:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from quad.localnet (home.bein.link [172.16.32.6]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.bein.link (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 848691AF26D; Sat, 20 Sep 2014 21:04:27 +0000 (UTC) From: Maxim V FIlimonov To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD-11.0-CURRENT on ARM: performance and load average Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 01:04:27 +0400 Message-ID: <1989123.lKm0QJoZES@quad> User-Agent: KMail/4.12.5 (FreeBSD/10.0-RELEASE-p8; KDE/4.12.5; amd64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1411241048.66615.148.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> References: <7351653.A2UeEk9AA3@quad> <1411241048.66615.148.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org, mav@freebsd.org, Ian Lepore X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 21:04:32 -0000 On Saturday 20 September 2014 13:24:08 Ian Lepore wrote: > Since it's happening only on that hardware, there's a good chance the > problem is in the allwinner a10/a20 clock driver, not in the general > eventtimer code. In fact, looking at the code it appears that a > divide-by-16 is being set in the hardware, but not accounted for when > setting the frequency of the eventtimer. > > Hmm, it should affect the timecounter too, in which case you'd see > time-of-day advancing 16x too fast. If ntpd is running it would need to > step the clock pretty frequently, which would show up in syslog. > I'm running FreeBSD-current on the board right now, the time is just fine. > I don't have hardware to test on, please see if the attached patch makes > a difference. > Well, it did: with the patch applied, the time ran about 60 times as fast as it should have. I didn't notice any changes with load average, though: maybe it's because I forgot to turn that sysctl setting I set before back to 0. wbr, Maxim Filimonov che@bein.link