On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 20:24 -0500, Chuck Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 11:20:38PM +0100, Florian Schmidt mista.tapas-at-gmx.net |LAU| wrote:
> > > Any other suggestions? The original problem is that the system clock
> > > is extremely slow, causing the time to be off and things like "sleep 1"
> > > to take 10 to 30 times as long as they should.
> >
> > Hmm,
> >
> > try with or without high resolution timer support compiled in. Also if
> > you can confirm it doesn't happen with vanilla, i'd suggest reporting
> > this to Ingo.
>
> Nothing in the responses so far from this list has solved the problem.
> I reported it to Ingo on Feb. 10, and received no reply. I've since
> compiled and tested a number of patched kernels, and I've determined
> that the problem began with patch-2.6.13-rt13, since the problem occurs
> with patch-2.6.13-rt13, but not with patch-2.6.13-rt12. I then reported
> this finding to Ingo on Feb. 22, and I still haven't received a reply.
>
> Is there anyone on this list familiar enough with the kernel and the
> realtime patches to give me a clue as to where to start looking? I
> can't find a changelog for the realtime patches anywhere, and looking
> at a diff of the source trees for both patched kernels doesn't turn up
> anything obvious. I know C, but am unfamiliar with the kernel code,
> and trying to understand it enough to know where to begin looking will
> probably take some time. Any help that might shorten the amount of
> time I have to study the code would be much appreciated. Thanks.
I didn't see a report of this on the kernel mailing list. A post to
LKML with Ingo CC'ed is much more likely to get results than mailing him
privately - I often send requests for tech support via private mail
to /dev/null as I don't have the bandwidth to help people unless it's in
a public forum where others can get the answer from Google next time.
Lee
Received on Sun Feb 26 20:22:04 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 26 2006 - 20:22:05 EET