From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 22 18:20:50 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 251DA16A420; Wed, 22 Feb 2006 18:20:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (66-23-211-162.clients.speedfactory.net [66.23.211.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A28F43D6A; Wed, 22 Feb 2006 18:20:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k1MIKbT1045049; Wed, 22 Feb 2006 13:20:37 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: Andrey Chernov Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 12:05:37 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <200602211047.06599.jhb@freebsd.org> <200602221101.41027.jhb@freebsd.org> <20060222162046.GA16663@nagual.pp.ru> In-Reply-To: <20060222162046.GA16663@nagual.pp.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200602221205.40160.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1297/Tue Feb 21 16:44:31 2006 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL autolearn=ham version=3.1.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: current@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: [PATCH] possible fix for the runtime going backwards warnings X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 18:20:50 -0000 On Wednesday 22 February 2006 11:20, Andrey Chernov wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 11:01:39AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > Is it more or less than before the patch? Also, what happens if you just back > > Less than (for me). So the patch was a net improvement? > > The pagezero ones are truly odd. calcru() shouldn't be called for kthreads > > very often (if at all). I wonder if your tickrate is changing out from under > > you. Try editing sys/i386/i386/tsc.c and where it does 'set_cputicker(rdtsc, > > tsc_freq, 1)' change the last parameter to '0' and see if they go away. > > May it interfere with ntpd activity? I have those log lines in one chunk: > Feb 22 03:36:43 pobrecita ntpd[422]: time reset +0.622691 s > Feb 22 03:36:43 pobrecita ntpd[422]: kernel time sync disabled 2041 > Feb 22 03:37:45 pobrecita kernel: calcru: runtime went backwards from 292542 usec to 292537 usec for pid 29 (pagezero) > Feb 22 03:37:45 pobrecita kernel: u 0:0/0 s 38:292542/292537 i 0:0/0 It should not affect ntp. It is just about the usage calculations for processes, not related to timekeeping or wall time. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org