[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1348572145.3881.18.camel@twins>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:22:25 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pjt@...gle.com,
paul.mckenney@...aro.org, tglx@...utronix.de, tj@...nel.org,
suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, venki@...gle.com, mingo@...hat.com,
robin.randhawa@....com, Steve.Bannister@....com,
Arvind.Chauhan@....com, amit.kucheria@...aro.org,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
patches@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] workqueue: Schedule work on non-idle cpu instead of
current one
On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 16:06 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> @@ -1066,8 +1076,9 @@ int queue_work(struct workqueue_struct *wq,
> struct work_struct *work)
> {
> int ret;
>
> - ret = queue_work_on(get_cpu(), wq, work);
> - put_cpu();
> + preempt_disable();
> + ret = queue_work_on(wq_select_cpu(), wq, work);
> + preempt_enable();
>
> return ret;
> }
Right, so the problem I see here is that wq_select_cpu() is horridly
expensive..
> @@ -1102,7 +1113,7 @@ static void delayed_work_timer_fn(unsigned long
> __data)
> struct delayed_work *dwork = (struct delayed_work *)__data;
> struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq = get_work_cwq(&dwork->work);
>
> - __queue_work(smp_processor_id(), cwq->wq, &dwork->work);
> + __queue_work(wq_select_cpu(), cwq->wq, &dwork->work);
> }
Shouldn't timer migration have sorted this one?
--
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