[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOJsxLEOsTC9mLo12dEpeatkgKq0xHjZXhGcO7Z99JHs3-D=9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 10:03:24 +0300
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
Leonid Moiseichuk <leonid.moiseichuk@...ia.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
patches@...aro.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] vmevent: Convert from deferred timer to deferred work
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Anton Vorontsov
<anton.vorontsov@...aro.org> wrote:
> If you're saying that we should set up a timer in the userland and
> constantly read /proc/vmstat, then we will cause CPU wake up
> every 100ms, which is not acceptable. Well, we can try to introduce
> deferrable timers for the userspace. But then it would still add
> a lot more overhead for our task, as this solution adds other two
> context switches to read and parse /proc/vmstat. I guess this is
> not a show-stopper though, so we can discuss this.
>
> Leonid, Pekka, what do you think about the idea?
That's exactly the kind of half-assed ABI that lead to people
inventing out-of-tree lowmem notifiers in the first place.
I'd be more interested to know what people think of Minchan's that
gets rid of vmstat sampling.
--
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