[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: PATCH: Fix race in cpu_down (hotplug cpu)
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 09:28 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Nick Piggin <> wrote:

> > Oh really? I think yes, the latency should be taken care of because we
> > want to be able to provide good latency even for !preempt kernels. If
> > a solution can be found for acpi_processor_idle, that would be ideal.
> the ACPI idle code runs with irqs disabled anyway, so there's no issue
> here. If something takes long there, we can do little about it. (but in
> practice ACPI sleep latencies are pretty ok - the only latencies i found
> in the past were due to need_resched bugs in the ACPI idle routine)

Ah, in that case I agree: we have nothing to worry about by merging
such a patch then.

> > IMO it always felt kind of hackish to run the idle threads with
> > preempt on.
> Yes, idle threads can have preemption disabled. There's not any big
> difference in terms of latencies, the execution paths are all very
> short.

Thanks for the confirmation Ingo. This is part of my "cleanup resched
and cpu_idle" patch FYI. It should already be in -mm, but has some
trivial EM64T bug in it that Andrew hits but I can't reproduce.

I'll dust it off and send it out, hopefully someone will be able to
reproduce the problem!

SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Send instant messages to your online friends

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: 2005-09-19 09:39    [W:2.939 / U:0.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site