[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171226151746.GA6560@lerouge>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 16:17:48 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/4] nohz: Prevent erroneous tick stop invocations
On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 03:51:13PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> The conditions in irq_exit() to invoke tick_nohz_irq_exit() are:
>
> if ((idle_cpu(cpu) && !need_resched()) || tick_nohz_full_cpu(cpu))
>
> This is too permissive in various aspects:
>
> 1) If need_resched() is set, then the tick cannot be stopped whether
> the CPU is idle or in nohz full mode.
That's not exactly true. In nohz full mode the tick is not restarted on the
switch from idle to a single task. And if an idle interrupt wakes up a
single task and enqueues a timer, we want that timer to be programmed even
though we have need_resched().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists