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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 11:06:42 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Anton Blanchard <anton@....ibm.com>, Tim Pepper <lnxninja@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/15] nohz_task: Avoid nohz task cpu as non-idle timer target On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 16:47 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 16:24 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > Unbound timers are preferably targeted for non idle cpu. If > > possible though, prioritize idle cpus over nohz task cpus, > > because the main point of nohz task is to avoid unnecessary > > timer interrupts. > > Oh is it? > > I'd very much expect the cpu that arms the timer to get the interrupt. I > mean, if the task doesn't want to get interrupted by timers, > _DON'T_USE_TIMERS_ to begin with. > > So no, don't much like this at all. I think this comes from other tasks on other CPUs that are using timers. Although, I'm not sure what causes an "unbound" timer to happen. I thought timers usually go off on the CPU that asked for it to go off. -- Steve -- 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