lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [v7 0/8] Reduce cross CPU IPI interference
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 10:29:57AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Feb 2012, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> > > Some pinned timers might be able to get special treatment as well - take for
> > > example the vmstat work being schedule every second, what should we do with
> > > it for CPU isolation?
> >
> > Right, I remember I saw these vmstat timers on my way when I tried to get 0
> > interrupts on a CPU.
> >
> > I think all these timers need to be carefully reviewed before doing anything.
> > But we certainly shouldn't adopt the behaviour of migrating timers by default.
> >
> > Some timers really needs to stay on the expected CPU. Note that some
> > timers may be shutdown by CPU hotplug callbacks. Those wouldn't be migrated
> > in case of CPU offlining. We need to keep them.
> >
> > > It makes sense to me to have that stop scheduling itself when we have the tick
> > > disabled for both idle and a nohz task.
>
> The vmstat timer only makes sense when the OS is doing something on the
> processor. Otherwise if no counters are incremented and the page and slab
> allocator caches are empty then there is no need to run the vmstat timer.

So this is a typical example of a timer we want to shutdown when the CPU is idle
but we want to keep it running when we run in adaptive tickless mode (ie: shutdown
the tick while the CPU is busy).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-09 16:55    [W:0.117 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site