Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 17:03:58 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: "Jose M. Alcaide" <jose@we.lc.ehu.es> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>, freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: proposal of a better solution for "statclock broken" laptops Message-ID: <200004062303.RAA25151@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <38ED1721.BF297B57@we.lc.ehu.es> References: <38ECA91E.F98AE48@we.lc.ehu.es> <200004061710.LAA22387@nomad.yogotech.com> <38ED1721.BF297B57@we.lc.ehu.es>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Ahh, it was *you* that proposed the fix, and later assigned it to Bruce. > > Can you tell me what is different about the fix you posted in your PR > > vs. this one? > > They deal with different problems. The statclock did not start on my > Dell I3.7k because of a pending interrupt being not cleared at startup. > The patch included in PR 17800 fixes this problem. Ok, so even if it starts up, it doesn't work right if you suspend, correct? > The "broken statclock" is a different problem, related to APM: some > machines cannot be put in suspended state while the statclock is generating > interrupts. I am very familiar with the problem, having had the luck of tracking it down about 2 years ago. :( I thought maybe you found a special initialization routine that caused it work without any special 'suspend/resume' code. > > Finally, not having the statclock is *really* not that big of a deal. > > It makes for better heuristics in the scheduler, but in fact makes very > > little difference in most machines as far as performance goes. > > True, we can live without the statclock, but if there is some way > to keep it working... (actually, the statclock problem is one of my > obsessions since I got my I3.7k in January) :-) :-) *grin* Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200004062303.RAA25151>