Hi, On 19/06/21 09:56, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sat, Jun 19 2021 at 01:35, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > The wild west of anything which scratches 'my itch' based on 'my use > > case numbers' in Linux ended many years ago and while RT was always a > > valuable playground for unthinkable ideas we definitely tried hard not > > to accept use case specific hacks wihtout a proper justification that it > > makes sense in general. > > > > So why are you even trying to sell this to me? > > I wouldn't have been that grumpy if you'd at least checked whether the > task is pinned. Still I would have told you that you "fix" it at the > wrong place. Ah, indeed. Pulled the trigger too early it seems. I'll ponder more. > Why on earth is that nohz heuristic trainwreck not even checking that? > It's not a RT problem and it's not a problem restricted to RT tasks > either. If a task is pinned then arming the timer on a random other CPU > is blatant nonsense independent of the scheduling class. Agree. Lemme look more into it. Thanks for the comments! Best, Juri
