[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Weird schedule delay time for cache_reap()
On Thursday 27 October 2005 04:28, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> can't convince myself that the 2nd argument in schedule_delayed_work
>called from cache_reap() function make any sense:

>static void cache_reap(void *unused)
>{ ...
>schedule_delayed_work(&__get_cpu_var(reap_work), REAPTIMEOUT_CPUC +
> Suppose one have a lucky 1024-processor big iron numa box,
> cpu0 will do cache_reap every 2 sec (REAPTIMEOUT_CPUC = 2*HZ).
> cpu512 will do cache_reap every 4 sec,
> cpu1023 will do cache_reap every 6 sec.
> Is the skew intentional on different CPU? Why different interval for
> different cpu#?

It looks like a buggy attempt to make the timers not cluster.
The +smp_processor_id() should be probably only done on the first iteration.
start_cpu_timer() does this already, so removing it should be ok.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-10-27 10:40    [W:0.030 / U:0.452 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site