Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:54:50 +1100 | From | nigel@suspend2 ... | Subject | Re: CONFIG_NO_HZ breaks blktrace timestamps |
| |
Hi.
Ingo Molnar wrote: > * nigel@suspend2.net <nigel@suspend2.net> wrote: > >>>>> Just out of curiosity, could you try the appended cumulative patch >>>>> and report .clock_warps, .clock_overflows and .clock_underflows as >>>>> you did. >>>> With those patches, CONFIG_NO_HZ works just fine. >> Could these patches also help with hibernation issues? I'm trying >> x86_64+NO_HZ, and seeing activity delayed during the atomic copy and >> afterwards until I manually generate interrupts (by pressing keys). > > i dont think that should be related to cpu_clock() use. Does the patch > below make any difference? (or could you try x86.git to get the whole > stack of x86 changes that we have at the moment.) Here's the coordinates > for x86.git:
Sorry for the delay in replying. Something seems to help, but I haven't managed to identify what yet. I don't think it was the patch appended because I'm on UP. If you care, I'll see if I can find the time to look more carefully.
Nigel
| |