[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1405091027040.11318@gentwo.org>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 10:28:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@...il.com>,
Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, hughd@...gle.com,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org
Subject: Re: vmstat: On demand vmstat workers V4
On Fri, 9 May 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Ok how do I figure out that cpu? I'd rather have a specific cpu that
> > never changes.
>
> I followed the full nohz development only losely, but back then when
> all started here at my place with frederic, we had a way to define the
> housekeeper cpu. I think we lazily had it hardwired to 0 :)
Yes that would be the easiest and simplest. We dedicate cpu 0 to OS
services around
here anyways.
> That probably changed, but I'm sure there is still a way to define a
> housekeeper. And we should simply force the timekeeping on that
> housekeeper. That comes with the price, that the housekeeper is not
> allowed to go deep idle, but I bet that in HPC scenarios this does not
> matter at all simply because the whole machine is under full load.
Excellent. Yes. Good.
> >
> > The vmstat kworker thread checks every 2 seconds if there are vmstat
> > updates that need to be folded into the global statistics. This is not
> > necessary if the application is running and no OS services are being used.
> > Thus we could switch off vmstat updates and avoid taking the processor
> > away from the application.
> >
> > This has also been noted by multiple other people at was brought up at the
> > mm summit by others who noted the same issues.
>
> I understand why you want to get this done by a housekeeper, I just
> did not understand why we need this whole move it around business is
> required.
This came about because of another objection against having it simply
fixed to a processor. After all that processor may be disabled etc etc.
--
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