linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 12/32] nohz: Try not to give the timekeeping duty to a cpuset nohz cpu

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:	Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:37:28 +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>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Tim Pepper <lnxninja@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
	Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/32] nohz: Try not to give the timekeeping duty to a
 cpuset nohz cpu

On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 17:17 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 04:55:45PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 17:52 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > Try to give the timekeeing duty to a CPU that doesn't belong
> > > to any nohz cpuset when possible, so that we increase the chance
> > > for these nohz cpusets to run their CPUs out of periodic tick
> > > mode. 
> > 
> > You and Dmitiri might want to get together:
> > 
> > lkml.kernel.org/r/20110823195628.GB4533@....com
> 
> Right!
> 
> There is another missing piece in my patchset. If every non adaptive-nohz
> CPUs are sleeping, then none is handling the do_timer duty and adaptive nohz
> CPUs run with a stale jiffies and walltime.

Doesn't nohz already deal with the case of all cpus being idle? In that
case the cpu that wakes up first gets to play catch up on irq_enter() or
so.


--
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/