Sorry for the delay, was on holidays.. On 11 December 2013 18:52, Frederic Weisbecker <fweis...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 01:57:37PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> - again got arch_timer interrupt after 5 ms (HZ=200) > > Right, looking at the details, the 2nd interrupt is caused by workqueue > delayed > work bdi writeback.
I am not that great at reading traces or kernelshark output, but I still feel I haven't seen anything wrong. And I wasn't talking about the delayed workqueue here.. I am looking at the trace I attached with kernelshark after filtering out CPU0 events: - Event 41, timestamp: 159.891973 - it ends at event 56, timestamp: 159.892043 And after that the next event comes after 5 Seconds. And so I was talking for the Event 41. >> So the query is: why don't we check that at the end of servicing vmstat >> stuff and migrating back to "stress" ?? > > I fear I don't understand your question. Do you mean why don't we prevent from > that bdi writeback work to run when we are in full dynticks mode? No.. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
