[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150331210636.GJ9974@htj.duckdns.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 17:06:36 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: cmetcalf@...hip.com,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: avoid nohz_full cores
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:58:41PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 03:25:59PM -0400, cmetcalf@...hip.com wrote:
> > From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>
> >
> > When queuing work, we should avoid queuing it on the local cpu if
> > we are using WORK_CPU_UNBOUND and the local cpu is nohz_full, since
> > the workqueue will mean a later interrupt of the nohz_full process
> > that presumably would prefer continuing to have 100% of the core
> > without interrupts.
> >
> > Likewise, remove the nohz_full cores from unbound workqueues. If
> > all the cores are nohz_full, we leave them in.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>
>
> Lai is already working on this: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/12/27
>
> All that will be needed after this patchset is to force the desired
> unbound workqueue mask on boot.
This applies to per-cpu workqueues too, not just unbound workqueues.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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