[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1434031116.4051.18.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 15:58:36 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: futex_wait() can DoS the tick
On Thu, 2015-06-11 at 15:13 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> What you are looking at is the actual timer interrupt vector, but
> that's not the the tick.
>
> # grep 'expire_entry.*tick_sched_timer' trace2 | wc -l
> 45
>
> 175 / 45 =~ 4 . So I you have CPNFIG_HZ=250
>
> The kernel does not care whether the actual interrupt happens or the
> timer is expired by other means.
Learn something new every day. I (obviously) had no idea that it's
perfectly fine for interrupts to go away when the CPU is busy.
Oh well. Thanks for the new wrinkle in the mush between my ears.
-Mike
--
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