From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755568AbZFXHQB (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2009 03:16:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751737AbZFXHPy (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2009 03:15:54 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:60938 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751633AbZFXHPx (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2009 03:15:53 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:15:55 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: David Miller Cc: andi@firstfloor.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: NMI watchdog + NOHZ question Message-ID: <20090624071555.GK6760@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20090622.022752.219499742.davem@davemloft.net> <20090623.171735.154729801.davem@davemloft.net> <20090624070315.GH6760@one.firstfloor.org> <20090624.000811.118222188.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090624.000811.118222188.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:08:11AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Andi Kleen > Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:03:15 +0200 > > >> I'm not exactly sure what to do about this. > > > > Ack the timer interrupt earlier (and also give it a high priority?) > > It has a higher priority, but all interrupts get re-enabled right > before we process software interrupts. So the flood of qla2xxx > interrupts can come in before we can run the timer softirq and > thus schedule the next timer interrupt. Ah you have a one shot timer and it gets rescheduled in the softirq? If yes why not in doing that directly in the hardirq handler? -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.