From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751799Ab3F0Jm7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2013 05:42:59 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:52265 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751457Ab3F0Jm6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2013 05:42:58 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 11:42:26 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, sbw@mit.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC nohz_full 0/8] Provide infrastructure for full-system idle Message-ID: <20130627094226.GP28407@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20130625213721.GA19452@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130626122022.GI28407@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20130626222442.GU3828@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130626222442.GU3828@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 03:24:42PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Just to make sure I understand... You are saying that it is OK for > NO_HZ_FULL to shut down timekeeping if all CPUs are idle, even if some > of them are taking NMIs from time to time, right? Yeah.. its what we currently do and I don't see any reason to have NO_HZ_FULL behave differently there.