[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190425123804.GU4038@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 14:38:04 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86 / CPU: Add cpu isolation flag for avoiding
disturbance from aperfmperf IPI
On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 03:27:12PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> On 25.04.2019 14:45, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 01:46:51PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > > Sensitive workloads like DPDK polling do not like any interrupts.
> > >
> > > This patch adds flag 'freq' for boot option 'isolcpu': isolcpu=freq,<cpus>.
> > >
> > > Users like show_cpuinfo() fallback to frequency from generic cpufreq
> > > policy if arch-specific requesting method returns 0.
> >
> > Then don't touch that sysfs file?
>
> What sysfs file?
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq
> I mean many applications read /proc/cpuinfo and this triggers IPI to all cpus.
Argh, I missed it was wired into that too :/
> > I really hate having an option for just this.
> >
>
> This could be generalized to 'isolate cpu from unnecessary IPI'.
> Something like mm pagevec drain also could be avoided.
Well, that should be a default feature of nohz full, no additional flags
required.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists