[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87tyls7iq3.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:55:00 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@...il.com>
Cc: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Interrupt latency on some 945GM platforms
Vasily Khoruzhick <anarsoul@...il.com> writes:
>> Whats the clockevent in this case ("Tick Device" section of
>> /proc/timer_list). clocksource= option only changes the clocksource used
>> to maintain
>> timeofday. But, timer interrupt (clockevent) source will not change.
>> Wondering how just the clocksource change is making the diff here..
>>
>> Also, if clocksource tsc has a higher rating than HPET. The reason
>> HPET is getting used as clocksource in the first place seems to be due
>> to TSC is not a dependable clocksource on this platform (may be it
>> stops in C3). So, I am not sure forcing it to tsc will be a good
>> thing. May be clocksource=acpi_pm is a better thing to try.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Venki
>
> I investigated it a bit and found out that single nohz=off option helps. Just
> changing clocksource doesn't help, but it works smoothly with any clocksource
> with nohz=off. So, it seems that something wrong with intel driver while
> system is in tickless mode.
It could be simply that nohz=off prevents the system from
going into lower idle states and it is related to that.
You could test this theory by running with processor.max_cstate=1
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists