lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: NMI watchdog + NOHZ question
    On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:08:11AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
    > From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
    > Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:03:15 +0200
    >
    > >> I'm not exactly sure what to do about this.
    > >
    > > Ack the timer interrupt earlier (and also give it a high priority?)
    >
    > It has a higher priority, but all interrupts get re-enabled right
    > before we process software interrupts. So the flood of qla2xxx
    > interrupts can come in before we can run the timer softirq and
    > thus schedule the next timer interrupt.

    Ah you have a one shot timer and it gets rescheduled in the softirq?
    If yes why not in doing that directly in the hardirq handler?

    -Andi
    --
    ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-06-24 09:19    [W:0.019 / U:0.924 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site