Re: [PATCH documentation 1/2] nohz1: Add documentation.

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 02:01:49PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > +KNOWN ISSUES
> 
> [...]
> 
> > +o	Unless all CPUs are idle, at least one CPU must keep the
> > +	scheduling-clock interrupt going in order to support accurate
> > +	timekeeping.
> 
> At least with the implementation I'm using (Frederic's 3.9-nohz1
> branch), at least one CPU is forced to stay out of dyntick-idle
> *always*, even if all CPUs are idle.
> 
> IMO, this is important to list as a known issue since this will have
> its own power implications when the system is mostly idle.

Good point!  I added the following at the end of the known issues:

o	If there are adaptive-ticks CPUs, there will be at least one
	CPU keeping the scheduling-clock interrupt going, even if all
	CPUs are otherwise idle.

> Otherwise, document looks great.  
> 
> Reviewed-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxx>

Added, thank you for the review and comments!

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/