Re: PROBLEM: Can't boot a (HZ = 1000) kernel using an AMD Phenom-II processor

[Mark Hounschell <dmarkh@cfl.rr.com>]

Mark Hounschell wrote:
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>> On Monday 19 January 2009, Mark Hounschell wrote:
>>> Mark Hounschell wrote:
>>>> I upgraded from a Phenom to a Phenom-II processor and I could no longer boot.
>>>>
>>>> I have tried kernels from 2.6.26 through 2.6.28.
>>>>
>>>> I _can_ however boot these kernels when they are configured for HZ = 250. I
>>>> haven't tried HZ = 300. But certainly if HZ = 1000 the boot hangs at the spot
>>>> indicated below in the dmesg output.
>>>>
>>>> The machine is up and stable running 2.6.26.8 with a (HZ = 1000) configured kernel.
>>>>
>>> The machine is up and stable running 2.6.26.8 with a (HZ = 250) configured
>>> kernel. Sorry.
>>>
>>>> While running a 2.6.26.8 kernel configured for HZ = 250:
>> [...]
>>
>>>> Checking if this processor honours the WP bit even in supervisor mode...Ok.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>       The 2.6.26.8 kernel hangs up right here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> CPA: page pool initialized 1 of 1 pages preallocated
>>>> SLUB: Genslabs=12, HWalign=64, Order=0-3, MinObjects=0, CPUs=4, Nodes=1
>>>> hpet clockevent registered
>>>> calibrate_delay_direct() failed to get a good estimate for loops_per_jiffy.
>>>> Probably due to long platform interrupts. Consider using "lpj=" boot option.
>>>> Calibrating delay loop... 3956.73 BogoMIPS (lpj=7913472)
>> Even if it boots it may not work reliably since lpj/BogoMIPS are too small
>> (they should be the same as for other CPUs) which in turn could result in too
>> short delay loops.
>>
>>>> Security Framework initialized
>>>> Capability LSM initialized
>>>> Mount-cache hash table entries: 512
>>>> CPU: L1 I Cache: 64K (64 bytes/line), D cache 64K (64 bytes/line)
>>>> CPU: L2 Cache: 512K (64 bytes/line)
>>>> CPU 0(4) -> Core 0
>>>> Checking 'hlt' instruction... OK.
>>>> ACPI: Core revision 20080321
>>>> ENABLING IO-APIC IRQs
>>>> ..TIMER: vector=0x31 apic1=0 pin1=2 apic2=-1 pin2=-1
>>>> CPU0: AMD Processor model unknown stepping 02
>>>> Booting processor 1/1 ip 2000
>>>> Initializing CPU#1
>>>> Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 6000.60 BogoMIPS (lpj=12001200)
>> Here are the proper values.
>>
>>>> CPU: L1 I Cache: 64K (64 bytes/line), D cache 64K (64 bytes/line)
>>>> CPU: L2 Cache: 512K (64 bytes/line)
>>>> CPU 1(4) -> Core 2
>>>> x86 PAT enabled: cpu 1, old 0x7040600070406, new 0x7010600070106
>>>> CPU1: AMD Processor model unknown stepping 02
>>>> Booting processor 2/2 ip 2000
>>>> Initializing CPU#2
>>>> Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 6000.47 BogoMIPS (lpj=12000950)
>> also OK
>>
>>>> CPU: L1 I Cache: 64K (64 bytes/line), D cache 64K (64 bytes/line)
>>>> CPU: L2 Cache: 512K (64 bytes/line)
>>>> CPU 2(4) -> Core 1
>>>> x86 PAT enabled: cpu 2, old 0x7040600070406, new 0x7010600070106
>>>> CPU2: AMD Processor model unknown stepping 02
>>>> Booting processor 3/3 ip 2000
>>>> Initializing CPU#3
>>>> Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 6000.47 BogoMIPS (lpj=12000955)
>> ditto
>>
>> That being said I don't know why delay calibration loop fails on CPU0.
>>
>> You may try booting with "lpj=12001200" kernel parameter to workaround
>> the issue (it should fix booting with HZ == 1000) and/or try 2.6.29-rc2
>> (the problem may have been already fixed).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bart
>>
> 
> I'll try "lpj=12001200" and 2.6.29-rc2 later when I get home this ev.
> 
> But I noticed CPU2 is different too. Is CPU1 the correct one?
> 
>>>> Initializing CPU#0
>>>> Calibrating delay loop... 3956.73 BogoMIPS (lpj=7913472)
> 
>>>> Initializing CPU#1
>>>> Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 6000.60 BogoMIPS (lpj=12001200)
> 
>>>> Initializing CPU#2
>>>> Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 6000.47 BogoMIPS (lpj=12000950)
> 
>>>> Initializing CPU#3
>>>> Calibrating delay using timer specific routine.. 6000.47 BogoMIPS (lpj=12000955)
> 

None of the lpj values made any difference. 2.6.29-rc2 did print a couple more
messages. The last one was

Using C1E aware idle routine
Checking 'hlt' in


Surely I can't be the only Linux user with this processor???

Regards
Mark