lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Oct]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] timer: Lazily wakup nohz CPU when adding new timer.
Cc'ing Frederic.

On 20-10-15, 15:47, Yunhong Jiang wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 08:12:39PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Sep 2015, Yunhong Jiang wrote:
> > > static void internal_add_timer(struct tvec_base *base, struct timer_list *timer)
> > > {
> > > + bool kick_nohz = false;
> > > +
> > > /* Advance base->jiffies, if the base is empty */
> > > if (!base->all_timers++)
> > > base->timer_jiffies = jiffies;
> > > @@ -424,9 +426,17 @@ static void internal_add_timer(struct tvec_base *base, struct timer_list *timer)
> > > */
> > > if (!(timer->flags & TIMER_DEFERRABLE)) {
> > > if (!base->active_timers++ ||
> > > - time_before(timer->expires, base->next_timer))
> > > + time_before(timer->expires, base->next_timer)) {
> > > base->next_timer = timer->expires;
> > > - }
> > > + /*
> > > + * CPU in dynticks need reevaluate the timer wheel
> > > + * if newer timer added with next_timer updated.
> > > + */
> > > + if (base->nohz_active)
> > > + kick_nohz = true;
> > > + }
> > > + } else if (base->nohz_active && tick_nohz_full_cpu(base->cpu))
> > > + kick_nohz = true;
> >
> > Why do you want to kick the other cpu when a deferrable timer got added?
>
> This is what happens in current implementation and this patch does not
> change the logic. According to the comments, it's to avoid race with
> idle_cpu(). Frankly speaking, I didn't get the idea of the race.
>
> Viresh, do you have any hints?

I haven't looked at the core since few months now and looks like I
don't remember anything :)

This thread is where we discussed it initially:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=139039035809125

AFAIU, this is why we kick the other CPU for a deferrable timer:
- The other CPU is a full-dynticks capable CPU and may be running
tickless and we should serve the timer in time (even if it is
deferrable) if the CPU isn't idle.
- We could have saved the kick for a full-dynticks idle CPU, but a
race can happen where we thought the CPU is idle, but it has just
started serving userspace tick-lessly. And the timer wouldn't be
served for long time, even when the cpu was busy.

Ofcourse, Frederic will kick me if I forgot the lessons he gave me
earlier :)

--
viresh


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-10-21 13:01    [W:1.410 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site