linux-kernel - Re: [LNG] Re: [Query] Ticks happen in pair for NO_HZ

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 18 Dec 2013 20:03:12 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	Linaro Networking <linaro-networking@...aro.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [LNG] Re: [Query] Ticks happen in pair for NO_HZ_FULL cores ?

On 18 December 2013 19:21, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org> wrote:
> Ah, I see.  So you're basically asking why we can't evaluate whether to
> turn off the tick more often, for example right after the workqueues are
> done.  I suppose Frederic may have some views on that, but there's
> likely additional overhead from those checks as well as that workqueues
> may not be the only thing keeping us out of NO_HZ.

I see that sched_switch is called at the end most of the times so an check
there might be useful ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/