linux-kernel - init_timer_deferrable conversion

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0712162149220.4622@mini.warudkars.net>
Date:	Sun, 16 Dec 2007 22:00:23 -0500 (EST)
From:	Parag Warudkar <parag.warudkar@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: init_timer_deferrable conversion

In my quest to get the wake-ups from idle per second down to bare minimum, 
I noticed 3 places in the kernel that could benefit from 
using init_timer_deferrable() instead of init_timer() -

a) drivers/net/sky2.c - watchdog_timer. This was showing up high on 
Powertop's list of things that cause routine wakeups from idle. After 
converting to init_timer_deferrable() the wakeups went down and this one 
no longer shows up in powertop's list. 25% reduction.

b) kernel/time/clocksource.c - watchdog_timer - same story as sky2.c

c) net/core/neighbour.c - gc_timer - Most benefit from deferrable timer.

I am running a kernel with above changes and haven't noticed any immediate 
problems and the wakeups-from-idle have gone down from 5-7 to mere 1-2 per 
second.

Is there any reason not to make the above timers deferrable - corner 
cases, other side effects? If not then I will submit a patch.

Thanks

Parag
--
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/