Re: CONFIG_NO_HZ breaks blktrace timestamps

[nigel]

Hi.

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * nigel@xxxxxxxxxxxx <nigel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>>>>> Just out of curiosity, could you try the appended cumulative patch 
>>>>> and report .clock_warps, .clock_overflows and .clock_underflows as 
>>>>> you did.
>>>> With those patches, CONFIG_NO_HZ works just fine.
>> Could these patches also help with hibernation issues? I'm trying 
>> x86_64+NO_HZ, and seeing activity delayed during the atomic copy and 
>> afterwards until I manually generate interrupts (by pressing keys).
> 
> i dont think that should be related to cpu_clock() use. Does the patch 
> below make any difference? (or could you try x86.git to get the whole 
> stack of x86 changes that we have at the moment.) Here's the coordinates 
> for x86.git:

Sorry for the delay in replying. Something seems to help, but I haven't
managed to identify what yet. I don't think it was the patch appended
because I'm on UP. If you care, I'll see if I can find the time to look
more carefully.

Nigel

--
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/