[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1DEE93B2-BA74-4266-A3C1-22A9DDEB63A8@fb.com>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 17:51:01 +0000
From: Song Liu <songliubraving@...a.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@...a.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] watchdog: Prefer use "ref-cycles" for NMI watchdog
> On May 17, 2023, at 12:31 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 04:58:17PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
>> NMI watchdog permanently consumes one hardware counters per CPU on the
>> system. For systems that use many hardware counters, this causes more
>> aggressive time multiplexing of perf events.
>>
>> OTOH, some CPUs (mostly Intel) support "ref-cycles" event, which is rarely
>> used. Try use "ref-cycles" for the watchdog, so that one more hardware
>> counter is available to the user. If the CPU doesn't support "ref-cycles",
>> fall back to "cycles".
>>
>> The downside of this change is that users of "ref-cycles" need to disable
>> nmi_watchdog.
>
> I still utterly hate how you hardcode ref-cycles
OK.. let me try with kernel cmdline args. Sending v3.
Thanks,
Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists