lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Question]: try to fix contention between expire_timers and try_to_del_timer_sync
Hi Will,

On 2017-07-31 06:13, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Vikram,
>
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:09:38PM -0700, Vikram Mulukutla wrote:
>> On 2017-07-28 02:28, Will Deacon wrote:
>> >On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 06:10:34PM -0700, Vikram Mulukutla wrote:

>> >
>> This does seem to help. Here's some data after 5 runs with and without
>> the
>> patch.
>
> Blimey, that does seem to make a difference. Shame it's so ugly! Would
> you
> be able to experiment with other values for CPU_RELAX_WFE_THRESHOLD? I
> had
> it set to 10000 in the diff I posted, but that might be higher than
> optimal.
> It would be interested to see if it correlates with num_possible_cpus()
> for the highly contended case.
>
> Will

Sorry for the late response - I should hopefully have some more data
with
different thresholds before the week is finished or on Monday.

Thanks,
Vikram
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-04 01:25    [W:0.086 / U:6.788 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site