From: Josh Don <joshdon@google.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86: optimization to avoid CAL+RES IPIs
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 22:53:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABk29NsN_3kH4xyY1v0FixMDuGb_rG_iUYDFtwd3U5n10LsjaA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrXHEhwBS72_Fiv9LbPjsBGp_rMmU16oYMTZJFa=wTki8A@mail.gmail.com>
Hey Andy, thanks for taking a look.
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 8:14 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> PeterZ and I fixed a whole series of bugs a few years ago, and remote
> wakeups *should* already do this. Did we miss something? Did it
> regress? Even the call_function_single path ought to go through this:
>
> void send_call_function_single_ipi(int cpu)
> {
> struct rq *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
>
> if (!set_nr_if_polling(rq->idle))
> arch_send_call_function_single_ipi(cpu);
> else
> trace_sched_wake_idle_without_ipi(cpu);
> }
>
Yep, I was sitting on this for a bit and raced with b2a02fc43a there.
90b5363ac also got rid of the last smp_send_reschedule() that was
triggering the ipiless handling.
One of the nice parts of the patch was that it could blanket apply to
all of the smp_call/reschedule. However, with the above patches that
isn't a concern; it makes more sense to keep the existing
TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG logic.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-18 5:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-18 2:13 [RFC][PATCH] x86: optimization to avoid CAL+RES IPIs Josh Don
2020-07-18 3:14 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-07-18 5:53 ` Josh Don [this message]
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=CABk29NsN_3kH4xyY1v0FixMDuGb_rG_iUYDFtwd3U5n10LsjaA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=joshdon@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).