On Tuesday 27 May 2014 19:28:06 Corey Minyard wrote: > On 05/27/2014 02:27 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Tuesday 27 May 2014 11:53:59 Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 05/27/14 11:49, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >>> You also commented in that thread about stop_critical_timings()/ > >>> start_critical_timings(). Corey, can you look at that, too? I > >>> think it's designed to avoid the issue you are seeing but > >>> for some reason doesn't. > >> I sent a patch last week to "solve" this problem. I'm not sure if it's > >> right but it works for me. > >> > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/19/607 > > I think that one was also wrong, as the intention of the existing > > stop_critical_timings() function is already to do the same that > > Corey's patch does, i.e. stop the trace before we go to idle as > > if we were turning IRQs on. > > > > Corey, does it work for you if you replace the new trace_hardirqs_on() > > you added with time_hardirqs_on() or stop_critical_timing()? > > Well, more information on this. It turns out that the generic idle loop > calls stop_critical_timing() and start_critical timing(), so the > arch_cpu_idle() shouldn't have to. > > However, the idle loop calls rcu_idle_enter() after it calls > stop_critical_timing(), and that is resetting the critical timing, it > appears. It's disabling/enabling interrupts in rcu_idle_enter(). If I > switch the order of the rcu_idle and critical timing calls, the issue > goes away. > > Stephen's patch does not seem to be necessary for my issue. I tried with > the patch applied, too. It doesn't seem to hurt, at least. It did not > fix the problem by itself, though. Interesting, it looked like the "big hammer" solution to me (compared to yours) that should deal with the problem in any case. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
