On Thu, 16 Feb 2017, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:20:14AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Frederic Weisbecker > > <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > I haven't followed the discussion but this patch has a known issue which is fixed > > > with: > > > 7bdb59f1ad474bd7161adc8f923cdef10f2638d1 > > > "tick/nohz: Fix possible missing clock reprog after tick soft restart" > > > > > > I hope this fixes your issue. > > > > No, Pavel saw the problem with rc8 too, which already has that fix. > > > > So I think we'll just need to revert that original patch (and that > > means that we have to revert the commit you point to as well, since > > that ->next_tick field was added by the original commit). > > Aw too bad, but indeed that late we don't have the choice. Hint: Look for CPU hotplug interaction of these patches. I bet something becomes stale when the CPU goes down and does not get reset when it comes back online. Thanks, tglx
