[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140115170835.GC11499@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 18:08:35 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
edumazet@...gle.com, darren@...art.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
sbw@....edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/timers 3/4] timers: Reduce future
__run_timers() latency for newly emptied list
On 01/14, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> @@ -700,6 +700,7 @@ static int detach_if_pending(struct timer_list *timer, struct tvec_base *base,
> base->next_timer = base->timer_jiffies;
> }
> base->all_timers--;
> + (void)catchup_timer_jiffies(base);
Agreed, but I think that detach_expired_timer() should do the same,
this can stop main loop in __run_timers().
Oleg.
--
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