lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: NMI watchdog + NOHZ question
From
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.

> That could be still problematic if you have non nestabled irq stacks
> (haven't checked if sparc has that or not),
> potentially you might need to run the softirq on the process stack.

IRQ stacks on sparc64 work identically to how they do on x86.

I have some more theories about this, in that I always see the
NMI watchdog message with a PC right in the section of CPU idle
where NOHZ is enabled.

On these cpus there is no support yielding, so on them I just
touch the NMI watchdog in the loop waiting for need_resched()
to become true.

But if we get the qla2xxx interrupt storm during that loop, it's
pretty easy to not touch the NMI watchdog in time.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-24 09:11    [W:0.121 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site