[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1206141702300.3086@ionos>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:07:30 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch 2/5] smpboot: Provide infrastructure for percpu
hotplug threads
On Thu, 14 Jun 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 07:47 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > RCU callback processing consumes the entire CPU in RCU_BOOST case where
> > processing runs at real-time priority. This is analogous to RT throttling
> > in the scheduler.
>
> But previously we can in non-preemptible softirq context, why would if
> behave differently when done from a RT task?
softirqs are different. They loop ten times and then wake ksoftirqd
which runs with sched_other.
Though that's wonky, because if an interrupt arrives before ksoftirqd
can take over we loop another 10 times in irq_exit(). Rinse and
repeat.....
And the main difference is that the scheduler does not yell on the
softirq context, but it yells when an rt task monopolizes the cpu.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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