Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Mar 2013 08:45:07 -0700 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] nohz1: Documentation |
| |
On 3/20/2013 5:27 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > I'm not sure I would recommend idle=poll either. It would certainly > work, but it goes to the other extreme. You think NO_HZ=n drains a > battery? Try idle=poll.
do not ever use idle=poll on anything production.. really bad idea.
if you temporary cannot cope with the latency, you can use the PMQOS system to limit (including going all the way to idle=poll). but using idle=poll completely is very nasty for the hardware.
In addition we should document that idle=poll will cost you peak performance, possibly quite a bit.
the same is true for the kernel paramter to some extend; it's there to work around broken bioses/hardware/etc; if you have a latency/runtime requirement, it's much better to use PMQOS for this from userspace.
| |