Re: [RFC PATCH v3] tick/sched: Ensure quiet_vmstat() is called when the idle tick was stopped too

From: Aaron Tomlin
Date: Mon Apr 25 2022 - 10:51:20 EST

Next message: Steven Rostedt: "Re: [PATCH v4 09/10] trace: platform/x86/intel/ifs: Add trace point to track Intel IFS operations"
Previous message: Dan Carpenter: "Re: [PATCH] jfs: remove unused pointer tblk"
In reply to: Christoph Lameter: "Re: [RFC PATCH v3] tick/sched: Ensure quiet_vmstat() is called when the idle tick was stopped too"
Next in thread: Marcelo Tosatti: "Re: [RFC PATCH v3] tick/sched: Ensure quiet_vmstat() is called when the idle tick was stopped too"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon 2022-04-25 16:06 +0200, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> It may depend though on how long the idle periods are. Do we have
> statistics on the duration? Always folding the vmstat deltas may also
> increase the length of the idle periods.

Unfortunately I do not. I noticed that this situation can occur via source
code and vmcore analysis.

Kind regards,

--
Aaron Tomlin

Next message: Steven Rostedt: "Re: [PATCH v4 09/10] trace: platform/x86/intel/ifs: Add trace point to track Intel IFS operations"
Previous message: Dan Carpenter: "Re: [PATCH] jfs: remove unused pointer tblk"
In reply to: Christoph Lameter: "Re: [RFC PATCH v3] tick/sched: Ensure quiet_vmstat() is called when the idle tick was stopped too"
Next in thread: Marcelo Tosatti: "Re: [RFC PATCH v3] tick/sched: Ensure quiet_vmstat() is called when the idle tick was stopped too"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]