Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 02/15] nohz_task: Avoid nohz task cpu as non-idle timer target | From | Steven Rostedt <> | Date | Mon, 20 Dec 2010 11:06:42 -0500 |
| |
On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 16:47 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 16:24 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > Unbound timers are preferably targeted for non idle cpu. If > > possible though, prioritize idle cpus over nohz task cpus, > > because the main point of nohz task is to avoid unnecessary > > timer interrupts. > > Oh is it? > > I'd very much expect the cpu that arms the timer to get the interrupt. I > mean, if the task doesn't want to get interrupted by timers, > _DON'T_USE_TIMERS_ to begin with. > > So no, don't much like this at all.
I think this comes from other tasks on other CPUs that are using timers. Although, I'm not sure what causes an "unbound" timer to happen. I thought timers usually go off on the CPU that asked for it to go off.
-- Steve
| |