linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/41] nohz: Try not to give the timekeeping duty to an adaptive tickless 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]

Message-ID: <CAFTL4hzM0socf0BphDmD7qv8W8wyJnBNkuXV9tv+yo=AJUYMRg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 8 May 2012 19:35:45 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linaro-sched-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
	Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...era.com>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Geoff Levand <geoff@...radead.org>,
	Gilad Ben Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
	Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...com>,
	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <thebigcorporation@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/41] nohz: Try not to give the timekeeping duty to an
 adaptive tickless cpu

2012/5/7 Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>:
> On Tue, 1 May 2012, 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.
>>
>> [TODO: We need to find a way to ensure there is always one non-nohz
>> running CPU maintaining the timekeeping duty if every non-idle CPUs are
>> adaptive tickless]
>
> I sure wish this would also be pinnable to a specific cpu.

Yeah, well we need to be more flexible and allow for finegrained sets of CPUs,
I quoted some reasons in one of our previous discussions:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/3/29/559
--
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/