[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1314633063.2816.103.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 17:51:03 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@....ibm.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tim Pepper <lnxninja@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/32] nohz/cpuset: Wake up adaptive nohz CPU when a
timer gets enqueued
On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 17:52 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Wake up a CPU when a timer list timer is enqueued there and
> the CPU is in adaptive nohz mode. Sending an IPI to it makes
> it reconsidering the next timer to program on top of recent
> updates.
>
> include/linux/sched.h | 4 ++--
> kernel/sched.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 5 ++++-
> kernel/timer.c | 2 +-
> 4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
So here I would have expected timer_needs_cpu() and an addition to
tick_nohz_can_stop_tick(). Why does sched.c get touched at all?
Also, all the delta_jiffies stuff in the current
tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick() deals with this, why duplicate the logic?
--
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