[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200508083601.GJ19464@codeaurora.org>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2020 14:06:01 +0530
From: Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@...eaurora.org>
To: Parth Shah <parth@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, qais.yousef@....com,
chris.hyser@...cle.com, valentin.schneider@....com,
rjw@...ysocki.net
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/4] sched/idle: Disable idle call on least latency
requirements
On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 07:07:22PM +0530, Parth Shah wrote:
> Restrict the call to deeper idle states when the given CPU has been set for
> the least latency requirements
>
> Signed-off-by: Parth Shah <parth@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
> kernel/sched/idle.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/idle.c b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> index b743bf38f08f..85d72a6e2521 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/idle.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/idle.c
> @@ -262,7 +262,8 @@ static void do_idle(void)
> * broadcast device expired for us, we don't want to go deep
> * idle as we know that the IPI is going to arrive right away.
> */
> - if (cpu_idle_force_poll || tick_check_broadcast_expired()) {
> + if (cpu_idle_force_poll || tick_check_broadcast_expired() ||
> + per_cpu(nr_lat_sensitive, cpu)) {
> tick_nohz_idle_restart_tick();
> cpu_idle_poll();
> } else {
> --
> 2.17.2
>
Since nr_lat_sensitive updates can happen remotely (when a latency sensitive
task becomes non-latency sensitive task), we may need to add this condition
in cpu_idle_poll() as well.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists