[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140903095410.GJ4783@worktop.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 11:54:10 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Chuansheng Liu <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
"Wang, Xiaoming" <xiaoming.wang@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Chakravarty, Souvik K" <souvik.k.chakravarty@...el.com>,
"Liu, Changcheng" <changcheng.liu@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: Add new API wake_up_if_idle() to wake up the
idle cpu
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 02:21:51PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2014 3:52 AM, "Chuansheng Liu" <chuansheng.liu@...el.com> wrote:
> > +void wake_up_if_idle(int cpu)
> > +{
> > + struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > +
> > + if (set_nr_if_polling(rq->idle)) {
> > + trace_sched_wake_idle_without_ipi(cpu);
> > + } else {
> > +
>
> FWIW, adding:
>
> if (rq->curr != rq->idle)
> return;
>
> Right here could improve performance on large, mostly non-idle
> systems. It would skip the spinlock in most cases.
>
!is_idle_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