[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51107E6A.3040006@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 11:37:14 +0800
From: Honghui Zhang <zhanghonghui@...wei.com>
To: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@...dex.ru>
CC: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/rt: Decrease number of calls of push_rt_task()
in push_rt_tasks()
On 2013/2/1 5:57, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>
>
> 31.01.2013, 20:08, "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>:
>> On Mon, 2013-01-28 at 03:46 +0400, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>>
>>> The patch aims to decrease the number of calls of push_rt_task()
>>> in push_rt_tasks().
>>>
>>> It's not necessary to push more than 'num_online_cpus() - 1' tasks.
>>> If just pushed task doesn't leave its new CPU during our local call
>>> of push_rt_tasks() than we won't push another task to the CPU.
>>> If it leave or change priority than it will pull new task by itself.
>>
>> I'm curious. Have you hit situations where this was an issue? Or was
>> this just discovered by code review?
>
> No, I did't hit this situation. It's impossible to hook every situation.
>
> Thanks for your explanation.
>
> Kirill
>
Suppose we have a large number of cpus(say 4096), with the last one running
a low-priority task on it. Is it possible with this patch we will never reach
the last cpu in case that previous cpu has complete the pulled task?
--
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