Comment 10 for bug 2051342

@andysem correct, without `nohz_full` specified at boot CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL has no effect, except for the little extra overhead that it's adding to the tick handler (there is still some overhead with this option enabled, even if it's not used). That's why I'd like to measure the time spent in some of the tick callbacks (using bpftrace) with generic vs lowlatency, to have a better understanding of this extra overhead.

Then, yes, repeating the tests disabling the ticks on some CPUs (booting with nohz_full) would be another interesting metric.