lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] timers/nohz: introduce nohz_full_aggressive
On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 11:03:07AM +0200, Anna-Maria Behnsen wrote:
> On Sun, 7 May 2023, Andrea Righi wrote:
>
> > On Sun, May 07, 2023 at 10:08:52AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > >
> > > [ Added Anna-Maria who is doing some timer work as well ]
> > >
> > > On Sun, 7 May 2023 11:07:00 +0200
> > > Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@canonical.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Now, I think what is really happening here is that you are somewhat
> > > simulating the results that Anna-Maria has indirectly. That is, you
> > > just prevent an idle CPU from waking up to handle interrupts when not
> > > needed.
> > >
> > > Anna-Maria,
> > >
> > > Do you have some patches that Andrea could test with?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > -- Steve
> >
> > Thanks for looking at this (and I'm happy to help Anna-Maria with any
> > test).
>
> I posted v6 of the queue - but forgot to add you to cc list. Here is the
> current version:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230510072817.116056-1-anna-maria@linutronix.de/
>
> I have to mention, that there is still the issue with the fair scheduler
> which wakes up the CPU where the process_timeout() timer was enqueued,
> because it assumes that context is still cache hot.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anna-Maria

OK, will take a look, thanks!

-Andrea

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-05-10 11:56    [W:2.504 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site