lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Feb]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/4] sched: Don't account tickless CPU load on tick
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 11:34:33AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 07:05:13PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 10:50:16AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 05:01:26PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > So lets check all the things we call on scheduler_tick():
> > > >
> > > > _ sched_clock_tick(): maybe it doesn't need to be called when idle. I'm not sure.
> > > > Some code in idle (timers, irqs, ...) might need to call sched_clock().
> > >
> > > Only needed if you've got a shady TSC.
> >
> > Yeh.. IMO, this can be done without the tick handling during nohz, with the
> > patch I am attaching. Could you check the patch? Or we have to handle it
> > remotely, too. (for a crazy TSC)
>
> I think NOHZ_FULL already requires the TSC not to be wrecked.

What about the regular NOHZ? Or does not any code in idle call a kind of
sched_lock_cpu() at all?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-02-02 02:01    [W:0.106 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site