Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 10 Nov 2014 12:41:38 +0530 | Subject | Re: [NOHZ] Remove scheduler_tick_max_deferment | From | Viresh Kumar <> |
| |
On 6 November 2014 22:54, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> wrote:
> We did not need to housekeeper in the dynticks idle case. What is so > different about dynticks busy?
We do have a running task here and so the stats are important..
> I may not have the complete picture of the timer tick processing in my > mind these days (it has been a lots of years since I did any work there > after all) but as far as my arguably simplistic reading of the code goes I > do not see why a housekeeper would be needed there. The load is constant > and known in the dynticks busy case as it is in the dynticks idle case.
I tried to initiate a thread on similar stuff, might be helpful:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/22/131
| |