Re: nohz: Warn if the machine can not perform nohz_full

From: Frederic Weisbecker
Date: Mon Jul 15 2013 - 21:01:46 EST


On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 01:24:23PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 07:18:02PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> > > So I guess you guys never want this to be enabled on distro kernels ?
> > > If that's the case, can you add something to that effect in Kconfig ?
> >
> > I believe we want it to be enabled on distros in the long term. But right now it would
> > be a bad idea until the off case (nohz_full= parameter empty) is carefully optimized.
> > I'm currently working on that.
> >
> > Now for the unstable tsc, which is what it's about on the above code block, we need
> > the tick to be there to leverage the sched clock madness. May be there could be some
> > other solution that could work along full dynticks but for now we chose the easy path.
> >
> > Are broken TSCs that common?
>
> I just hit one apparently. http://paste.fedoraproject.org/25421/73907845/raw/
> That's a fairly recent Atom board, so I suspect it's not uncommon on that platform.
>
> > Also what is the preffered way to tell the distros that they shouldn't enable that option
> > for now? Here is what we currently have in the tail of the related Kconfig help:
> >
> > This is implemented at the expense of some overhead in user <-> kernel
> > transitions: syscalls, exceptions and interrupts. Even when it's
> > dynamically off.
>
> "This feature is not ready to be deployed" ?

I can try this one. Or may be I should be more direct and put:

"This feature is not ready to be deployed on distros"

>
> "This will taint the kernel if it decides it can't work" ?
>
> Dave
>
--
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/