lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCHSET] cpuhog: implement and use cpuhog
    Date
    On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 01:43:31 pm Tejun Heo wrote:
    > Hello, Peter.
    >
    > On 03/11/2010 04:25 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > > cpuhog as a name doesn't work for me, stop-machine had a name that
    > > described its severity and impact, cpuhog makes me think of while(1);.
    > >
    > > Can't we keep the stop_machine name and make that a workqueue interface
    > > like you propose?
    > >
    > > That way we'd end up with something like:
    > >
    > > kernel/stop_machine.c
    > > int stop_cpu(int cpu, stop_fn_t fn, void *arg)
    > > int stop_machine(struct cpumask *mask, stop_fn_t fn, void *arg)
    >
    > The distinction would be diabling of IRQ on each CPU.
    > hog_[one_]cpu[s]() schedule highest priority task to, well, hog the
    > cpu but doesn't affect contextless part of the cpu (irq, bh, whatnot).

    I rather like the name. And the stop_machine name is still there; it's just
    using cpuhog rather than workqueues.

    Ugly things should have ugly names.

    For Patch 2/4 at least:

    Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>

    Great work Tejun!
    Rusty.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-03-29 08:49    [W:0.020 / U:1.408 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site