[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <877gjyxmiq.fsf@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:01:49 -0700
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, josh@...htriplett.org,
niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
edumazet@...gle.com, darren@...art.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
sbw@....edu, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH documentation 1/2] nohz1: Add documentation.
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> +KNOWN ISSUES
[...]
> +o Unless all CPUs are idle, at least one CPU must keep the
> + scheduling-clock interrupt going in order to support accurate
> + timekeeping.
At least with the implementation I'm using (Frederic's 3.9-nohz1
branch), at least one CPU is forced to stay out of dyntick-idle
*always*, even if all CPUs are idle.
IMO, this is important to list as a known issue since this will have
its own power implications when the system is mostly idle.
Otherwise, document looks great.
Reviewed-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>
Kevin
--
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