lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: nohz problem with idle time on old hardware
On Wed, 9 Apr 2014 20:50:59 +0530
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:

> On 9 April 2014 20:01, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> > Ouch! You are correct, this part of the patch makes no sense. That's
> > what I get for reviewing a patch and not looking at all the code around
> > the changes. (another kernel developer hangs head in shame :-( )
> >
> > I think that if statement should be nuked.
>
> Hmm, my opinion differs here :)
>
> If we completely remove this statement, we will run
> tick_nohz_switch_to_nohz() even if nohz is not enabled. And check for
> enabled must stay.

Do we? This is only called by tick_check_oneshot_change() which has the
following:

int tick_check_oneshot_change(int allow_nohz)
{
struct tick_sched *ts = &__get_cpu_var(tick_cpu_sched);

if (!test_and_clear_bit(0, &ts->check_clocks))
return 0;

if (ts->nohz_mode != NOHZ_MODE_INACTIVE)
return 0;

if (!timekeeping_valid_for_hres() || !tick_is_oneshot_available())
return 0;

if (!allow_nohz)
return 1;

tick_nohz_switch_to_nohz();
return 0;
}

How often does it make it to that last check?

-- Steve


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-09 18:01    [W:0.060 / U:0.116 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site