lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Future of NOHZ full/isolation development (was Re: [NOHZ] Remove scheduler_tick_max_deferment)
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 08:26:05PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 12 November 2014 19:24, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd rather leave that to tracepoints. Like trace_hrtimer_spurious().
>
> Yeah, it was just to prove things right on the console without getting
> into traces.
>
> > Or better yet: have trace_hrtimer_interrupt() which we can compare against
> > trace_hrtimer_expire_entry/exit() to check if any hrtimer callback have run
> > in the interrupt. This way we avoid workarounds like the above count.
>
> Yeah, I also believe we better add this debug information to mainline kernel.
> I will try to get a patch for that soon.
>
> Would it be recommended to add both trace points?
> i.e. trace_hrtimer_interrupt() and trace_hrtimer_spurious()

I don't think you need to add anything. We already have tracepoints for
every single interrupt (and therefore also for the hrtimer one) and we
have expiry tracepoints.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-11-12 16:41    [W:0.064 / U:1.496 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site