Re: Ping RTT clock resolution problem on x86_64 | |
| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] | |
Please say that you have entered this in bugzilla... this is important Joshua On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 01:58:57PM -0700, Federico Sacerdoti wrote: > Hello, > > I am a developer from the Rocks project in San Diego. We are noticing a > problem with the clock resolution for TCP round trip times that only > emerges on AMD Opteron systems. The bug is characterized as follows: > > The issue is that the clock resolution is only 10ms: ie any rtt value > between 0-10ms is reported as 0.00ms. > > --On Opteron (bug)-- > root@www root]# ping google.com > PING google.com (216.239.37.99) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=0 ttl=238 time=89.9 ms > 64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=238 time=79.9 ms > 64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=236 time=79.9 ms > > [root@www root]# ping nbc.com > PING nbc.com (63.241.60.70) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from nbc.com (63.241.60.70): icmp_seq=0 ttl=53 time=0.000 ms > 64 bytes from nbc.com (63.241.60.70): icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=0.000 ms > > > --On Other systems (normal)-- > [root@rocks-43 root]# ping google.com > PING google.com (216.239.57.99) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 216.239.57.99: icmp_seq=0 ttl=244 time=11.5 ms > 64 bytes from 216.239.57.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=244 time=11.8 ms > 64 bytes from 216.239.57.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=244 time=11.5 ms > 64 bytes from 216.239.57.99: icmp_seq=3 ttl=244 time=11.7 ms > > [root@rocks-43 root]# ping nbc.com > PING nbc.com (63.241.60.70) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from nbc.com (63.241.60.70): icmp_seq=0 ttl=53 time=7.41 ms > 64 bytes from nbc.com (63.241.60.70): icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=7.32 ms > 64 bytes from nbc.com (63.241.60.70): icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=7.39 ms > 64 bytes from nbc.com (63.241.60.70): icmp_seq=3 ttl=53 time=7.33 ms > > > This behavior happens for several different types of ethernet cards on > opterons, and is not observed on either Pentium or Nocona systems. > > Has anyone noticed this before? Our kernel version is: > > (Nocona) > Linux rocks-43.sdsc.edu 2.4.21-20.EL #1 SMP Fri Oct 1 09:12:23 PDT 2004 > x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > (Opteron) > Linux www.rocksclusters.org 2.4.21-20.ELsmp #1 SMP Sat Sep 18 18:28:16 > PDT 2004 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > Thank you, > Federico > > Rocks Cluster Group, San Diego Supercomputer Center, CA > > -- > > amd64-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/amd64-list -- Joshua Jensen joshua@xxxxxxxx "If God didn't want us to eat animals, why did he make them out of meat?" -- amd64-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/amd64-list
[Search] [Home] [Kernel List] [Linux ia64] [Linux X86_64] [Red Hat Install] [Red Hat Migration] [Red Hat Development] [Red Hat 9 Bible] [Red Hat 9 Mailing List] [Fedora Legacy] [Yosemite News]