* (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