From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Daniel Vacek <neelx.g@gmail.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@sssup.it>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: your mail
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 09:25:43 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161116092543.663e1d2c@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161116104014.GQ3142@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016 11:40:14 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On top of which, the implementation had issues; now I know you're the
> blinder kind of person that disregards everything not in his immediate
> interest, but if you'd looked at the patch you'd have seen he'd added
> code the idle entry path, which will slow down every single to-idle
> transition.
Isn't to-idle a bit bloated anyway? Or has that been fixed. I know
there was some issues with idle_balance() which can add latency to
wakeups. idle_balance() is also in the to-idle path.
Note, that this is a sched feature which would be a nop (jump_label)
when disabled. And I'm sure it could also be optimized to be a static
inline as well when it is enabled.
I'm not saying we need to go this approach, but I'm just saying that
the to-idle issue is a bit of a red herring.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-16 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-15 20:29 (unknown) Christoph Lameter
2016-11-15 21:58 ` ??? Steven Rostedt
2016-11-16 10:40 ` your mail Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-16 14:25 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2016-11-16 14:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-09-24 20:44 (unknown) Steven Rostedt
2007-09-24 20:50 ` your mail Steven Rostedt
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=20161116092543.663e1d2c@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=neelx.g@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tommaso.cucinotta@sssup.it \
/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).