On Thu, 30 Aug 2018, John Crispin wrote:
> > Sry, that disturbing you all, but what are the conclusion here for 4.14.y?
> > - take Thomas's patch
> > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/969521/#1162900
> > - revert commit 2d898915ccf4838c04531c51a598469e921a5eb5
>
> Hi Frederic,
>
> I repor
> Sry, that disturbing you all, but what are the conclusion here for 4.14.y?
> - take Thomas's patch https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/969521/#1162900
> - revert commit 2d898915ccf4838c04531c51a598469e921a5eb5
Hi Frederic,
I reported this very issue to tglx last night and he asked me to ver
On 08/24/2018 01:41 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:10:44AM -0500, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>> Yes. i do not see local_softirq_pending messages any more
>>
>> But one question, just to clarify, after patch "nohz: Fix missing tick
>>
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:10:44AM -0500, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> Yes. i do not see local_softirq_pending messages any more
>
> But one question, just to clarify, after patch "nohz: Fix missing tick reprog
> while interrupting inline timer softirq"
> the tick_nohz_
On 08/24/2018 01:17 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 05:57:06PM -0500, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On 07/31/2018 05:52 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>> Before updating the full nohz tick or the idle time on IRQ exit, we
>>> check first if we are not in a nesting interrupt,
.c
> @@ -888,7 +888,7 @@ static bool can_stop_idle_tick(int cpu, struct tick_sched
> *ts)
> if (unlikely(local_softirq_pending() && cpu_online(cpu))) {
> static int ratelimit;
>
> - if (ratelimit < 10 &&
> + if (ratelimit < 10 &&
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 09:01:02AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 05:57:06PM -0500, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> > > This patch was back ported to the Stable linux-4.14.y and It causes
> > > regression -
> > > flood of "NOHZ: local_so
On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 05:57:06PM -0500, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> > This patch was back ported to the Stable linux-4.14.y and It causes
> > regression -
> > flood of "NOHZ: local_softirq_pending" messages on all TI boards during
> > boot (NFS boot):
> >
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 05:57:06PM -0500, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 07/31/2018 05:52 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Before updating the full nohz tick or the idle time on IRQ exit, we
> > check first if we are not in a nesting interrupt, whether the inner
> > interrupt is a hard or
Hi
On 07/31/2018 05:52 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Before updating the full nohz tick or the idle time on IRQ exit, we
> check first if we are not in a nesting interrupt, whether the inner
> interrupt is a hard or a soft IRQ.
>
> There is a historical reason for that: the dyntick idle mode u
On Wed, 1 Aug 2018, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 07:46:10PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> In fact I should remove this whole paragraph, it's about code history that's
> not relevant anymore and it confuses the whole explanation which should
> concern nohz_full only.
Ca
On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 07:46:10PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Aug 2018, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Before updating the full nohz tick or the idle time on IRQ exit, we
> > check first if we are not in a nesting interrupt, whether the inner
> > interrupt is a hard or a soft IRQ.
>
On Wed, 1 Aug 2018, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Before updating the full nohz tick or the idle time on IRQ exit, we
> check first if we are not in a nesting interrupt, whether the inner
> interrupt is a hard or a soft IRQ.
>
> There is a historical reason for that: the dyntick idle mode used to
>
On Wed, 1 Aug 2018, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Before updating the full nohz tick or the idle time on IRQ exit, we
> check first if we are not in a nesting interrupt, whether the inner
> interrupt is a hard or a soft IRQ.
>
> There is a historical reason for that: the dyntick idle mode used to
Before updating the full nohz tick or the idle time on IRQ exit, we
check first if we are not in a nesting interrupt, whether the inner
interrupt is a hard or a soft IRQ.
There is a historical reason for that: the dyntick idle mode used to
reprogram the tick on IRQ exit, after softirq processing,
15 matches
Mail list logo
