Re: [patch 1/4] Ignore stolen time in the softlockup watchdog

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Tue Apr 24 2007 - 17:00:44 EST

* Daniel Walker <dwalker@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 13:24 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > And sched_clock's use of local_irq_save/restore appears to be absolutely
> > correct, so I think it must be triggering a bug in either the self-tests
> > or lockdep itself.
> Why does sched_clock need to disable interrupts?

i concur. To me it appears not "absolutely correct" that someone
apparently added local_irq_save/restore to sched_clock(), but "absolute
madness". sched_clock() is _very_ performance-sensitive for the
scheduler, do not mess with it.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at