[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180410141707.GL3126663@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 07:17:07 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mm, slab: reschedule cache_reap() on the same CPU
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:12:08AM -0500, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> > @@ -4074,7 +4086,8 @@ static void cache_reap(struct work_struct *w)
> > next_reap_node();
> > out:
> > /* Set up the next iteration */
> > - schedule_delayed_work(work, round_jiffies_relative(REAPTIMEOUT_AC));
> > + schedule_delayed_work_on(reap_work->cpu, work,
> > + round_jiffies_relative(REAPTIMEOUT_AC));
>
> schedule_delayed_work_on(smp_processor_id(), work, round_jiffies_relative(REAPTIMEOUT_AC));
>
> instead all of the other changes?
Yeah, that'd make more sense.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists