Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 18:34:54 +0800 From: Jia-Shiun Li <jiashiun@gmail.com> To: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Konstantin Belousov <kib@freebsd.org>, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> Subject: Re: Strange issue after early AP startup Message-ID: <CAHNYxxPqcuk9axdwxnCOHO16Rve5NmPqq5xcnyfGeLJJK%2BCw5A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <f675e822-afce-b666-72ca-9a6ea77209e5@selasky.org> References: <b9c53237-4b1a-a140-f692-bf5837060b18@selasky.org> <1484682389.86335.166.camel@freebsd.org> <11f27a15-f9bc-8988-a17e-78aeff1745fb@selasky.org> <3558195.Ack1AKBXSB@ralph.baldwin.cx> <24593c49-b0d5-8aaf-e11b-bfef4704267e@selasky.org> <f675e822-afce-b666-72ca-9a6ea77209e5@selasky.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> wrote: > > I can add prints/asserts to show that what happens is that > "state->nextcallopt > now" while "state->nextcall <= now". This situtation > is allowed to persist due to the way getnextcpuevent() is currently > implemented. > > Can the people CC'ed give the attached patch a spin and report back? > > As far as c2d system time is concerned, it works correctly for me w/ r312210. -Jia-Shiun.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAHNYxxPqcuk9axdwxnCOHO16Rve5NmPqq5xcnyfGeLJJK%2BCw5A>