[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090223110725.GB17312@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:07:25 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, ego@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
andi@...stfloor.org, venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com,
vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, arun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] timers: framework for migration between CPU
* Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> My understanding is that we will certainly have a sysfs
> tunable to 'enable' timer migration or consolidation, similar
> to the sched_mc=2 policy, but the actual set of CPUs to
> evacuate and the correct set of target CPUs to consolidate
> should come from the scheduler and not necessarily from the
> user space.
Yes.
> The scheduler should be able to figure out the following
> parameters:
>
> * Identify set of idle CPUs (CPU package) from which timers
> can be removed
> * Identify a semi-idle or idle CPU package to which the timers
> can be moved
> * Decide when to start moving timers as the system has large
> number of idle CPUs
> * Decide when to stop migrating as system becomes less idle
> and utilisation increases
>
> Guiding all of the above decisions from user space may not be
> fast enough.
Exactly.
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists