On Saturday 04 February 2006 19:03, Lee Revell wrote:this is the relevent (as far as i know) section of my .config i'm using now.
On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 21:10 -0500, Ed Sweetman wrote:
I know this has been gone over before, and I am aware of the possibleExcellent question. What's the status of this bug? It's a showstopper
fix being the use of the pmtmr.
My question is, if there is support builtin to the kernel for more than
one timer, and we know that no timer but the pmtimer is reliable on a
dual core system, why doesn't the startup of the kernel choose the
pmtimer based on if it detects the system is a dual core proc with smp
enabled? And if the pmtimer doesn't fix this sync issue, is there a
fix out there? Currently with 2.6.16-rc1-mm5 the non-customized boot
args to the kernel results in these messages.
for a ton of people on the JACK list...
As Andi has recounted many times already, pmtmr is now the default on x86-64 if it's built in. I'm sure you can confirm this from the sources.
[alistair] 19:52 [~] uname -a
Linux damocles 2.6.15.1 #5 SMP PREEMPT Wed Feb 1 09:43:23 GMT 2006 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
[alistair] 19:52 [~] dmesg | egrep -e time.c.*PM
time.c: Using 3.579545 MHz PM timer.
time.c: Using PM based timekeeping.