[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121211134758.GA7084@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 05:47:58 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, mingo@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
namhyung@...nel.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, sbw@....edu,
amit.kucheria@...aro.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, rjw@...k.pl,
wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/9] CPU hotplug: Provide APIs to prevent CPU
offline from atomic context
Hello, Srivatsa.
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 06:43:54PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> This approach (of using synchronize_sched()) also looks good. It is simple,
> yet effective, but unfortunately inefficient at the writer side (because
> he'll have to wait for a full synchronize_sched()).
While synchornize_sched() is heavier on the writer side than the
originally posted version, it doesn't stall the whole machine and
wouldn't introduce latencies to others. Shouldn't that be enough?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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