Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1383126 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-04-20 10:00 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-04-20 10:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched: Correctly handle nohz ticks cpu load accounting Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 10:00 +0200
| From | Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-20 10:00 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched: Correctly handle nohz ticks cpu load accounting |
| Message-ID | <rpVdg-4bE-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi Frederic, 2016-04-13 21:56 GMT+08:00 Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>: > Ticks can happen while the CPU is in dynticks-idle or dynticks-singletask > mode. In fact "nohz" or "dynticks" only mean that we exit the periodic > mode and we try to minimize the ticks as much as possible. The nohz > subsystem uses a confusing terminology with the internal state > "ts->tick_stopped" which is also available through its public interface > with tick_nohz_tick_stopped(). This is a misnomer as the tick is instead > reduced with the best effort rather than stopped. In the best case the > tick can indeed be actually stopped but there is no guarantee about that. > If a timer needs to fire one second later, a tick will fire while the > CPU is in nohz mode and this is a very common scenario. > > Now this confusion happens to be a problem with cpu load updates: > cpu_load_update_active() doesn't handle nohz ticks correctly because it > assumes that ticks are completely stopped in nohz mode and that > cpu_load_update_active() can't be called in dynticks mode. When that > happens, the whole previous tickless load is ignored and the function > just records the load for the current tick, ignoring potentially long > idle periods behind. This is for one timer interrupt per second scenario, right? Regards, Wanpeng Li
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web