From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Chen,
Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>,
"'Chris Mason'" <mason@suse.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] smt nice introduces significant lock contention
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 20:19:28 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200606022019.29023.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <447FF6B8.1000700@yahoo.com.au>
On Friday 02 June 2006 18:28, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Con Kolivas wrote:
> > On Friday 02 June 2006 17:53, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >>This is a small micro-optimisation / cleanup we can do after
> >>smtnice gets converted to use trylocks. Might result in a little
> >>less cacheline footprint in some cases.
> >
> > It's only dependent_sleeper that is being converted in these patches. The
> > wake_sleeping_dependent component still locks all runqueues and needs to
>
> Oh I missed that.
>
> > succeed in order to ensure a task doesn't keep sleeping indefinitely.
> > That
>
> Let's make it use trylocks as well. wake_priority_sleeper should ensure
> things don't sleep forever I think? We should be optimising for the most
> common case, and in many workloads, the runqueue does go idle frequently.
wake_priority_sleeper is only called per tick which can be 10ms at 100HZ. I
don't think that's fast enough. It could even be possible for a lower
priority task to always just miss the wakeup if it's (very) unlucky.
--
-ck
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-06-02 10:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-01 22:55 [PATCH RFC] smt nice introduces significant lock contention Chris Mason
2006-06-01 23:57 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 1:59 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 2:28 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 3:55 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 4:18 ` Nick Piggin
2006-06-02 6:08 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 7:53 ` Nick Piggin
2006-06-02 8:17 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 8:28 ` Nick Piggin
2006-06-02 8:34 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 8:56 ` Nick Piggin
2006-06-02 9:17 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 9:25 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 9:31 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 9:34 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 9:53 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 10:12 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 20:53 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 22:15 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 22:19 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 22:31 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 22:58 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-03 0:02 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-03 0:08 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-03 0:27 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 9:36 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 10:30 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 13:16 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 21:54 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 22:04 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 22:14 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 10:19 ` Con Kolivas [this message]
2006-06-02 20:59 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 8:38 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 8:24 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 8:31 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 8:50 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 2:35 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-06-02 3:04 ` Con Kolivas
2006-06-02 3:23 ` Con Kolivas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200606022019.29023.kernel@kolivas.org \
--to=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mason@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.