On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 05:02:41PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
quoted text
> So then the first interrupt will see 3+ overflows, return 3+, and will
> thus eat 2+ NMIs, only one of which will be the pending interrupt,
> leaving 1+ NMIs from other sources to consume unhandled.
> 
> In which case Yinghai will have to press his NMI button 2+ times before
> it registers.
> 
> That said, that might be a better situation than always consuming
> unknown NMIs.. 

Well if the worse case scenario is only one extra NMI, then I can change
the logic in my patch to eat a max of 1 possible NMI instead of 2 as in the
example you gave above.

It still won't be 100% accurate but how often are people running perf
where they need 4 counters, have to hit an external nmi button or run into
broken firmware all at the same time? :-)

Cheers,
Don

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/