[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 08:58:35 -0600 (CST)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@...il.com>,
Max Krasnyansky <maxk@....qualcomm.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [NOHZ] Remove scheduler_tick_max_deferment
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Ok, I confess we moved part of that housekeeping to the syscall/exception/interrupt
> entry path. We did that for cputime accounting and RCU. And it's possible to
> even do that for timekeeping. But then the kernel entrypoint is going to be extremely
> costly. It's worth CPU 0 as a sacrificial lamb.
Well we can redirect to the scheduler setting the task flag and handle
costly stuff there if necessary?
--
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