Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch 43/69] i386: HPET, check if the counter works | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Date | Tue, 22 May 2007 00:12:32 +0200 |
| |
On Mon, 2007-05-21 at 14:57 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 21 May 2007 21:58:55 +0200 > Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > > > The warning in the NOHZ code, which triggers when a CPU goes idle with > > softirqs pending can fill up the logs quite quickly. Rate limit the > > output until we found the root cause of that problem. > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > > > > Index: linux-2.6.21/kernel/time/tick-sched.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-2.6.21.orig/kernel/time/tick-sched.c > > +++ linux-2.6.21/kernel/time/tick-sched.c > > @@ -167,9 +167,15 @@ void tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(void) > > goto end; > > > > cpu = smp_processor_id(); > > - if (unlikely(local_softirq_pending())) > > - printk(KERN_ERR "NOHZ: local_softirq_pending %02x\n", > > - local_softirq_pending()); > > + if (unlikely(local_softirq_pending())) { > > + static int ratelimit; > > + > > + if (ratelimit < 10) { > > + printk(KERN_ERR "NOHZ: local_softirq_pending %02x\n", > > + local_softirq_pending()); > > + ratelimit++; > > + } > > + } > > that's not a "rate" limit. I resist the temptation to rename it to "limit" > to keep mainline and -stable in sync, and coz it's temporary (we hope).
Point taken.
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/
| |