[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160821145302.GP3482@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 07:53:02 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: GeHao Kang <kanghao0928@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...nel.org
Subject: Re: Context switch latency in tickless isolated CPU
On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 07:26:04PM +0800, GeHao Kang wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 8:34 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> > Why are you wanting to use nohz_full if you do syscalls?
>
> We hope to reduce the overhead of the tick while the real time
> applications run,
> and these applications might do some syscalls to operate the I/O devices like
> EtherCAT.
If latency is all you care about, one approach is to map the device
registers into userspace and do the I/O without assistance from the
kernel.
Alternatively, use in-memory mailbox/queuing techniques to hand the
I/O off to some other thread.
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists