[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140904050424.GA26756@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 07:04:24 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Kautuk Consul <consul.kautuk@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Ionut Alexa <ionut.m.alexa@...il.com>,
Guillaume Morin <guillaume@...infr.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@...dex.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] do_exit(): Solve possibility of BUG() due to race
with try_to_wake_up()
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > Ah, I simply do not know what is cheaper, even on x86. Well,
> > we need to enable/disable irqs, but again I do not really
> > know how much does this cost.
>
> Ah good point about that IRQ thing, yes that's horribly
> expensive.
Enabling/disabling local IRQs is not really expensive (it's a
flat cost essentially - below 10 cycles on modern x86 CPUs) -
especially if we consider the 100x-1000x frequency difference
between schedule() and exit(), on typical systems:
$ grep -E 'ctxt|processes' /proc/stat
ctxt 47166536
processes 91876
And that's from a system that emphatically does not schedule
much. On others the difference is much larger.
So please don't push complexity into the scheduler from
lower-freq areas of the kernel!
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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