From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755930Ab0CIUOl (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2010 15:14:41 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:35291 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755248Ab0CIUOj (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2010 15:14:39 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 12:13:59 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Corey Minyard Cc: Jean Delvare , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Linux Kernel , Martin Wilck , OpenIPMI Developers , Gary Smith Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] IPMI: Add parameter to limit CPU usage in kipmid Message-Id: <20100309121359.40766d99.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <4B96A633.2080207@acm.org> References: <20100303161438.GA17623@minyard.local> <201003091305.58136.jdelvare@suse.de> <4B96A633.2080207@acm.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.9; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:49:07 -0600 Corey Minyard wrote: > Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Corey, Linus, > > > > On Wednesday 03 March 2010 05:14:38 pm Corey Minyard wrote: > > > >> From: Martin Wilck > >> > >> In some cases kipmid can use a lot of CPU. This adds a way to tune > >> the CPU used by kipmid to help in those cases. By setting > >> kipmid_max_busy_us to a value between 100 and 500, it is possible to > >> bring down kipmid CPU load to practically 0 without loosing too much > >> ipmi throughput performance. Not setting the value, or setting the > >> value to zero, operation is unaffected. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck > >> Cc: Jean Delvare > >> Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard > >> --- > >> This patch has been discussed quite a bit, and I believe all issues with it > >> have been resolved. It's not great, but nobody has a better way to handle > >> the problem. > >> > > > > I still can't see this patch in Linus' tree as of 2.6.34-rc1. It has been > > waiting for sooo long already, can we finally get it in? Linus, will you apply > > it? Or should it go through Andrew? > > > It's already in Andrew's patches. It would be good if this could go in > for 2.6.34, I think it has been through enough review and such. yup, I have it queued for 2.6.34. -rc1 caught me napping so some scrambling is happening.