On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 11:31 AM Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Right, this should fix the issue: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210913145332.232023-1-frederic@xxxxxxxxxx/ Hmm. Can you explain why the fix isn't just to revert that original commit? It looks like the only real difference is that now it does *extra work* with all that tick_nohz_dep_set_signal(). Isn't it easier to just leave any old timer ticking, and not do the extra work until it expires and you notice "ok, it's not important"? IOW, that original commit explicitly broke the only case it changed - the timer being disabled. So why isn't it just reverted? What is it that kleeps us wanting to do the extra work for the disabled timer case? As long as it's fixed, I'm all ok with this, but I'm looking at the commit message for that broken commit, and I'm looking at the commit message for the fix, and I'm not seeing an actual _explanation_ for this churn. Linus
