Re: [PATCH] nohz: Fix collision between tick and other hrtimers

2016-12-29 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 05:42:48PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sat, 24 Dec 2016, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > static ktime_t tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(struct tick_sched *ts, > > ktime_t now, int cpu) > > { > > - struct clock_event_device *dev = > >

Re: [PATCH] nohz: Fix collision between tick and other hrtimers

2016-12-29 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Sat, 24 Dec 2016, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > static ktime_t tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(struct tick_sched *ts, >ktime_t now, int cpu) > { > - struct clock_event_device *dev = > __this_cpu_read(tick_cpu_device.evtdev); > u64 basemono, next_tick

Re: [PATCH] nohz: Fix collision between tick and other hrtimers

2016-12-26 Thread Wanpeng Li
2016-12-25 0:15 GMT+08:00 Frederic Weisbecker : > When the tick is stopped and an interrupt occurs afterward, we check on > that interrupt exit if the next tick needs to be rescheduled. If it > doesn't need any update, we don't want to do anything. > > In order to check if the tick needs an update,

Re: [PATCH] nohz: Fix collision between tick and other hrtimers

2016-12-26 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 09:56:57PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sat, 2016-12-24 at 17:15 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > When the tick is stopped and an interrupt occurs afterward, we check > > on > > that interrupt exit if the next tick needs to be rescheduled. If it > > doesn't need any

Re: [PATCH] nohz: Fix collision between tick and other hrtimers

2016-12-25 Thread Rik van Riel
On Sat, 2016-12-24 at 17:15 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > When the tick is stopped and an interrupt occurs afterward, we check > on > that interrupt exit if the next tick needs to be rescheduled. If it > doesn't need any update, we don't want to do anything. > > In order to check if the tick