From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 22 01:23:48 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22D5516A41F; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 01:23:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gemini@geminix.org) Received: from gen129.n001.c02.escapebox.net (gen129.n001.c02.escapebox.net [213.73.91.129]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6CB143D45; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 01:23:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gemini@geminix.org) Message-ID: <4382731A.9040904@geminix.org> Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 02:23:38 +0100 From: Uwe Doering Organization: Private UNIX Site User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051121 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Charles Sprickman References: <200511182215.04399.jhb@freebsd.org> <437F79F1.5040706@geminix.org> <200511211149.01165.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: from gemini by geminix.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.54 (FreeBSD)) id 1EeMsl-00029B-To; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 02:23:40 +0100 Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4.8 "Alternate system clock has died" error X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 01:23:48 -0000 Charles Sprickman wrote: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, John Baldwin wrote: >> On Saturday 19 November 2005 02:16 pm, Uwe Doering wrote: >>> John Baldwin wrote: >>>> [...] >>>> Actually, there was a patch that was committed in 5.4 and 6.0 for this >>>> issue. You can see the diff here: >>>> >>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/i386/isa/clock.c.diff?r1=1. >>>> >>>> 213&r2=1.214&f=h >>>> >>>> That patch would probably backport to 4.x fairly easily. >>> >>> I just looked at RELENG_4, and yes, backporting should be easy. Though >>> I haven't tried it yet on our machines. >>> >>> I wonder, however, what's writing to the RTC on a running server. Could >>> this event perhaps have been triggered by the recent Daylight Saving >>> Time switch? > >> Yep. Also, if you are using ntp, then the adjustments to the time are >> getting >> pushed back to the RTC as well. > > I run ntp everywhere. > > So it certainly looks easy enough for me to change the first two > sections of the diff referenced above, but I'm having issues finding > that last one in cpu_initclocks(). It looks like that section really > has changed quite a bit. (see v.1.206) Just look for all instances of writertc(RTC_STATUSB, rtc_statusb); and put rtcin(RTC_INTR); directly behind them (into the next line). There should be three of them, in 4.8 as well as RELENG_4 and CURRENT. > Is there any interest in moving this back to 4-STABLE? Interest there is, I suppose. Plenty of people still run 4.x. The question is rather whether there is any committer willing to do the backport. As far as I can tell, most of them are more focused on newer branches. Perhaps we need special backporting committers for legacy branches. Just a thought. ;-) > And lastly, is there any snippet of code that can twiddle the clock from > userspace and determine if it's wedged or dead? You may want to look at adjkerntz(8). Uwe -- Uwe Doering | EscapeBox - Managed On-Demand UNIX Servers gemini@geminix.org | http://www.escapebox.net