* (No subject header)
[not found] ` <4a831611847e8965ed5f3328e52fe8758115b951.1274926772.git.len.brown@intel.com>
@ 2010-05-27 5:25 ` Milton Miller
2010-05-27 5:47 ` Len Brown
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Milton Miller @ 2010-05-27 5:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Len Brown; +Cc: Peter Zijlstra, linux-acpi, linux-kernel
[Hmm, why did this not appear in patchwork.kernel.org? Now
I have to guess a CC list.]
On Wed, 26 May 2010 around 22:43:50 -0400 (EDT), Len Brown wrote:
> From: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
>
> TS_POLLING set tells the scheduler a task will poll
> need_resched() to look for work.
>
True
> TS_POLLING clear tells resched_task() and wake_up_idle_cpu()
> that the remote CPU is sleeping in idle, and thus requires
> a reschedule interrupt to wake them to notice work.
No, that only applies to the idle task.
>
> Update the description of TS_POLLING to reflect how it works.
> "cleared when sleeping in idle, requiring reschedule interrupt"
That would imply its set for every normal task that is not in some
kind of sleep state.
>
> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> -#define TS_POLLING 0x0004 /* true if in idle loop
> - and not sleeping */
> +#define TS_POLLING 0x0004 /* clear when sleeping in idle
> + requiring reschedule interrupt */
How about "idle task polling need_resched, skip sending interrupt"?
milton
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: (No subject header)
2010-05-27 5:25 ` (No subject header) Milton Miller
@ 2010-05-27 5:47 ` Len Brown
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Len Brown @ 2010-05-27 5:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Milton Miller; +Cc: Len Brown, Peter Zijlstra, linux-acpi, linux-kernel
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Milton Miller wrote:
>
> [Hmm, why did this not appear in patchwork.kernel.org? Now
> I have to guess a CC list.]
>
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 around 22:43:50 -0400 (EDT), Len Brown wrote:
> > From: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> >
> > TS_POLLING set tells the scheduler a task will poll
> > need_resched() to look for work.
> >
>
> True
>
> > TS_POLLING clear tells resched_task() and wake_up_idle_cpu()
> > that the remote CPU is sleeping in idle, and thus requires
> > a reschedule interrupt to wake them to notice work.
>
> No, that only applies to the idle task.
>
>
> >
> > Update the description of TS_POLLING to reflect how it works.
> > "cleared when sleeping in idle, requiring reschedule interrupt"
>
> That would imply its set for every normal task that is not in some
> kind of sleep state.
you're right, just the idle task sets this flag.
> > Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> > Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>
> > -#define TS_POLLING 0x0004 /* true if in idle loop
> > - and not sleeping */
> > +#define TS_POLLING 0x0004 /* clear when sleeping in idle
> > + requiring reschedule interrupt */
>
> How about "idle task polling need_resched, skip sending interrupt"?
I think that is an improvement over my wording.
Though technically we're not polling need_resched in the case
I have in mind. The hardware is snooping any write to the thread flags
via MONITOR/MWAIT trigger address.
cheers,
-Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-05-27 5:47 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1274928151-30919-1-git-send-email-lenb@kernel.org>
[not found] ` <e099975ca65a7f6ac7f8bc3fee84d3e03893aa31.1274926772.git.len.brown@intel.com>
[not found] ` <4a831611847e8965ed5f3328e52fe8758115b951.1274926772.git.len.brown@intel.com>
2010-05-27 5:25 ` (No subject header) Milton Miller
2010-05-27 5:47 ` Len Brown
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox