[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150511173305.GC32512@lerouge>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 19:33:06 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>,
Gilad Ben Yossef <giladb@...hip.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] support "dataplane" mode for nohz_full
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 10:27:44AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2015 10:19:16 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 08:57:59AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > >
> > > NO_HZ_LEAVE_ME_THE_FSCK_ALONE!
> >
> > NO_HZ_OVERFLOWING?
>
> Actually, "NO_HZ" shouldn't appear in the name at all. The objective
> is to permit userspace to execute without interruption. NO_HZ is a
> part of that, as is NO_INTERRUPTS. The "NO_HZ" thing is a historical
> artifact from an early partial implementation.
Agreed! Which is why I'd rather advocate in favour of CONFIG_ISOLATION.
--
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