From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] Ignore stolen time in the softlockup watchdog Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:48:32 -0700 Message-ID: <462E6D20.5000108@goop.org> References: <20070327214919.800272641@goop.org> <20070327215827.871954359@goop.org> <20070423234910.50149faf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <462E43A7.1050001@goop.org> <20070424105738.e0ce36a9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <462E4969.6070802@goop.org> <20070424113222.ed2e1314.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <462E61F1.7060403@goop.org> <462E6778.7070305@goop.org> <20070424133359.f18bce78.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20070424133359.f18bce78.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: Prarit Bhargava , Rick Lindsley , john stultz , Linux Kernel , Eric Dumazet , virtualization@lists.osdl.org, Chris Lalancette , Paul Mackerras , Martin Schwidefsky , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Andrew Morton wrote: > It's weird. And I don't think the locking selftest code calls > sched_clock() (or any other time-related thing) at all, does it? > I guess it ends up going through the scheduler, which does use it. But... J