[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130515171153.GF13916@laptop.home>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:11:53 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.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 06:59:15PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:27:02AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Right now perf requires a tick, not sure exactly why, but you can look
> > at the code in perf_event_task_tick(). Thus if NO_HZ_FULL sees that a
> > perf tick is pending, it won't disable ticks. Unfortunately, the
> > watchdogs, both NMI and soft lockup, use the perf infrastructure to
> > trigger NMIs or interrupts. This adds a perf element on the rotate list
> > and keeps NO_HZ_FULL from *ever* activating.
> >
>
> Hmm.. Stephane had a bunch of patches converting the rotation thing to
> an hrtimer. I seem to have forgotten what happened to them but I can't
> seem to find them merged.
>
> I'll go look.
>
> That leaves the frequency stuff, but the watchdog doesn't use that.
>
> At which point we could run the watchdog without perf_event_task_tick().
Found them:
1364991694-5876-1-git-send-email-eranian@...gle.com
Looks like they were stuck in my inbox and never applied, so I just did.
They should appear in tip soonish.
--
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