Re: [PATCH 07/27] nohz: Assign timekeeping duty to a non-full-nohzCPU

[Christoph Lameter]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2012, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> @@ -163,6 +164,8 @@ static int __init tick_nohz_full_setup(char *str)
>  	return 1;
>  }
>  __setup("full_nohz=", tick_nohz_full_setup);
> +#else
> +#define have_full_nohz_mask (0)
>  #endif
>
>  /*
> @@ -512,6 +515,10 @@ static bool can_stop_idle_tick(int cpu, struct tick_sched *ts)
>  		return false;
>  	}
>
> +	/* If there are full nohz CPUs around, we need to keep the timekeeping duty */
> +	if (have_full_nohz_mask && tick_do_timer_cpu == cpu)
> +		return false;
> +
>  	return true;
>  }
>
>

Ok so I guess this means that if I setup all cpus as nohz then a random
one will continue to do timekeeping?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/