[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110705112002.GA15654@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 13:20:02 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip, final] perf, x86: Add hw_watchdog_set_attr() in a
sake of nmi-watchdog on P4
* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 12:59:59PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ...
> >
> > are 'non-sleeping ticks' non-halted cycles - i.e. cycles that
> > always count with CPU frequency and can thus be used for periodic
> > frequencies?
>
> Yes, I think so (btw, as far as I remember oprofile does the same
> 'threshold' gaming for nmi-watchdog).
But the NMI watchdog does not need a constant frequency event - it
can use unhalted cycles just fine. Why does it need unhalted cycles
on P4?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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