Re: nohz problem with idle time on old hardware

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:23:38AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 08:18:29 -0800
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:12:57AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 17:07:18 +0100 (CET)
> > > Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Right. It's telling you if NOHZ is enabled. It's not telling you that
> > > > NOHZ is active.
> > > 
> > > Yeah, which makes this code rather silly:
> > > 
> > > in rcu_prepare_for_idle():
> > > 
> > > 	/* Handle nohz enablement switches conservatively. */
> > > 	tne = ACCESS_ONCE(tick_nohz_enabled);
> > > 	if (tne != rdtp->tick_nohz_enabled_snap) {
> > > 		if (rcu_cpu_has_callbacks(cpu, NULL))
> > > 			invoke_rcu_core(); /* force nohz to see update. */
> > > 		rdtp->tick_nohz_enabled_snap = tne;
> > > 		return;
> > > 	}
> > 
> > OK, what should I be checking instead?  Not much point in trying to
> > get RCU out of the way of disabling the scheduling-clock interrupt
> > if NOHZ is disabled.  ;-)
> 
> I'll leave the answer to Thomas, but checking tick_nohz_enabled just
> lets you know if someone booted with nohz=off or not (and has nohz
> configured). But it doesn't tell you if nohz is actually being used.

Based on Thomas's most recent response, it sounds like I need to check
a frozen shark or something.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

> That is, tick_nohz_enabled is set at bootup and never changes.
> 
> Perhaps this old hardware uncovered other bugs as well ;-)
> 
> -- Steve
>