[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKohpokDBga18BhZm=r+EOoY40=+E7Ndtfooq9rXbqc=wUg2Ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 20:03:12 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
Linaro Networking <linaro-networking@...aro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [LNG] Re: [Query] Ticks happen in pair for NO_HZ_FULL cores ?
On 18 December 2013 19:21, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org> wrote:
> Ah, I see. So you're basically asking why we can't evaluate whether to
> turn off the tick more often, for example right after the workqueues are
> done. I suppose Frederic may have some views on that, but there's
> likely additional overhead from those checks as well as that workqueues
> may not be the only thing keeping us out of NO_HZ.
I see that sched_switch is called at the end most of the times so an check
there might be useful ?
--
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