From: Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
mingo@elte.hu, josh@freedesktop.org, niv@us.ibm.com,
dino@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, vegard.nossum@gmail.com,
adobriyan@gmail.com, oleg@tv-sign.ru, bunk@kernel.org,
rjw@sisk.pl
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip-rcu] Make rcutorture more vicious: make quiescent rcutorture less power-hungry
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:02:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1214251374.4440.48.camel@Aeon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080623110706.197f25b1@infradead.org>
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 11:07 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:54:09 +0000
> Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm a little concerned about how this will affect real-time
> > performance, as queueing up lots of timers all at once can lead to
> > long running timer expiration handlers. If just a schedule_timeout,
> > I suppose we are only looking at a process wakeup, as opposed to a
> > softirq context callback function?
>
> in reality, the time it takes to deliver the interrupt (including
> waking the CPU up etc), is likely to be an order or two of magnitude
> higher than this kind of code loop....
Sure, if we just look at one of them. Any idea how many such items
we're looking at rounding up to fire at the same time? Is it dozens,
hundreds, thousands?
Thanks,
--
Darren Hart
Real-Time Linux Team Lead
IBM Linux Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-23 20:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-18 12:21 [PATCH] Make rcutorture more vicious: add stutter feature Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-18 13:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-18 16:26 ` [PATCH] Make rcutorture more vicious: reinstate boot-time testing Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-19 0:42 ` Josh Triplett
2008-06-19 9:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-19 15:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-19 21:17 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-06-20 5:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-21 1:39 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-06-22 20:06 ` [PATCH -tip-rcu] Make rcutorture more vicious: make quiescent rcutorture less power-hungry Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-22 20:17 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-06-22 21:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-24 11:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-23 17:54 ` Darren Hart
2008-06-23 18:07 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-06-23 20:02 ` Darren Hart [this message]
2008-06-23 20:07 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-06-23 20:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-23 21:28 ` Darren Hart
2008-06-22 20:58 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-22 21:24 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-25 19:24 ` [PATCH -tip-rcu] Make rcutorture more vicious: invoke RCU readers from irq handlers (timers) Paul E. McKenney
2008-06-26 7:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-26 15:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=1214251374.4440.48.camel@Aeon \
--to=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=dino@in.ibm.com \
--cc=josh@freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
/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