lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: nohz and strange sleep latencies
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Digging into process_32|64.c...
> >
> > 64:
> > while (1) {
> > while (!need_resched()) {
> > void (*idle)(void);
> >
> > if (__get_cpu_var(cpu_idle_state))
> > __get_cpu_var(cpu_idle_state) = 0;
> >
> > tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick();
> >
> > 32:
> > while (1) {
> > tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick();
> > while (!need_resched()) {
> > void (*idle)(void);
> >
> > if (__get_cpu_var(cpu_idle_state))
> > __get_cpu_var(cpu_idle_state) = 0;
> >
> > ...eek? Which one is wrong?
>
> Hm, it looks like you should have quoted more lines ...
>
> In the second case (32), the tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick() seems to be
> redundant, so I bet it's this one.

No. Both are fine. the 64bit version calls into
tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick() way to often. This is a leftover from the
old theory that we can have non-irq caused wakeups. Will fix it.

tglx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-11-25 22:55    [W:0.144 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site