[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170712121950.zfcoyjnduxxgat2m@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 14:19:50 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...el.com>, tglx@...utronix.de,
len.brown@...el.com, rjw@...ysocki.net, ak@...ux.intel.com,
tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
yang.zhang.wz@...il.com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 04/11] sched/idle: make the fast idle path for
short idle periods
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 06:33:55PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> if (!tick_nohz_full_cpu(smp_processor_id()) && likely(predicted_idle_us < short_idle_threshold))
> cpuidle_fast();
>
> Ugly but safer!
I'd not overly worry about this, cpuidle_fast() isn't anything that's
likely to ever happen.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists