[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130515165542.GD13916@laptop.home>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 18:55:42 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] nohz: Disable LOCKUP_DETECTOR when NO_HZ_FULL is
enabled
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:06:53AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> Coming into the middle of the thread is always hard, but why/how does perf
> disable nohz_full? I didn't think the hardware events of perf would cause
> problems as they are no different than an irq. Curious.
Yah, right :-) So I think what happens is that when we enter kernel
space for whatever reason (say NMIs for a watchdog), we kill the magic
NO_HZ state that allows a single task that's stuck in userspace to
effectively have the tick disabled.
But yeah, the initial patch was a tad light on detail, so I'll have to
let Steve and Frederic expand / correct.
--
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