Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Jul 2015 00:49:49 +0200 | From | Frederic Weisbecker <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND] nohz: Affining unpinned timers |
| |
On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 07:18:22PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jul 2015, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > I hope everybody received the patch because there is a ";" after each address :-) > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 02:01:33PM +0530, Vatika Harlalka wrote: > > > The problem addressed in this patch is about affining unpinned timers. > > > Adaptive or Full Dynticks CPUs should not be disturbed by unnecessary > > > jitter due to firing of such timers on them. > > > This patch will affine timers to online CPUs which are not Full Dynticks > > > in FULL_NOHZ configured systems. It will not bring about functional > > > changes if NOHZ_FULL is not configured, because is_housekeeping_cpu() > > > always returns true in CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL=n. > > > > > > Signed-off by: Vatika Harlalka <vatikaharlalka@gmail.com> > > > > The patch looks good to me. Peter, Thomas, are you ok with it too? > > By some definition of OK. The overhead of this is growing and growing. > > We really need to make this a pull not a push model.
I'm currently working toward that. See "[PATCH 0/8] tick/nohz: Tick dependency quick check + cleanups" as a first step.
Now for this very patch, I don't know how we could make it better. Any suggestion?
> Thanks, > > tglx
| |