From: "Alex,Shi" <alex.shi@intel.com>
To: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Fu, Michael" <michael.fu@intel.com>
Subject: nohz: remove nohz_cpu_mask
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 08:47:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1310345225.28599.10.camel@debian> (raw)
RCU didn't use this global variable now. Currently no user on it.
Since the ts->do_timer_last is not the real last periodic tick cpu in
most of time. I once want to compare the cpu_online_mask and
nohz_cpu_mask to get a real one, and than only let that cpu sleep
shorter, other cpu will try to sleep KTIME_MAX, that need a extra lock
for nohz_cpu_mask. But I checked my all platforms, from NHM-EX server to
laptops, all of them are waked up a few times per second. So, the
advantage is only in theory.
Since no clear usage of this variable, why not remove it? That can save
a cache-line in all cpus and reduce atomic sync contention.
Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
---
diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
index a837b20..6f5cfb3 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -270,7 +270,6 @@ extern void init_idle_bootup_task(struct task_struct *idle);
extern int runqueue_is_locked(int cpu);
-extern cpumask_var_t nohz_cpu_mask;
#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) && defined(CONFIG_NO_HZ)
extern void select_nohz_load_balancer(int stop_tick);
extern int get_nohz_timer_target(void);
diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index 3f2e502..a48343c 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -5907,15 +5907,6 @@ void __cpuinit init_idle(struct task_struct *idle, int cpu)
}
/*
- * In a system that switches off the HZ timer nohz_cpu_mask
- * indicates which cpus entered this state. This is used
- * in the rcu update to wait only for active cpus. For system
- * which do not switch off the HZ timer nohz_cpu_mask should
- * always be CPU_BITS_NONE.
- */
-cpumask_var_t nohz_cpu_mask;
-
-/*
* Increase the granularity value when there are more CPUs,
* because with more CPUs the 'effective latency' as visible
* to users decreases. But the relationship is not linear,
@@ -8010,8 +8001,6 @@ void __init sched_init(void)
*/
current->sched_class = &fair_sched_class;
- /* Allocate the nohz_cpu_mask if CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK */
- zalloc_cpumask_var(&nohz_cpu_mask, GFP_NOWAIT);
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
zalloc_cpumask_var(&sched_domains_tmpmask, GFP_NOWAIT);
#ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ
diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
index d5097c4..eb98e55 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
@@ -139,7 +139,6 @@ static void tick_nohz_update_jiffies(ktime_t now)
struct tick_sched *ts = &per_cpu(tick_cpu_sched, cpu);
unsigned long flags;
- cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, nohz_cpu_mask);
ts->idle_waketime = now;
local_irq_save(flags);
@@ -389,9 +388,6 @@ void tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(int inidle)
else
expires.tv64 = KTIME_MAX;
- if (delta_jiffies > 1)
- cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, nohz_cpu_mask);
-
/* Skip reprogram of event if its not changed */
if (ts->tick_stopped && ktime_equal(expires, dev->next_event))
goto out;
@@ -441,7 +437,6 @@ void tick_nohz_stop_sched_tick(int inidle)
* softirq.
*/
tick_do_update_jiffies64(ktime_get());
- cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, nohz_cpu_mask);
}
raise_softirq_irqoff(TIMER_SOFTIRQ);
out:
@@ -524,7 +519,6 @@ void tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick(void)
/* Update jiffies first */
select_nohz_load_balancer(0);
tick_do_update_jiffies64(now);
- cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, nohz_cpu_mask);
#ifndef CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING
/*
next reply other threads:[~2011-07-11 0:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-11 0:47 Alex,Shi [this message]
2011-07-11 17:30 ` nohz: remove nohz_cpu_mask Paul E. McKenney
2011-07-15 0:51 ` Alex,Shi
2011-07-19 0:53 ` Alex,Shi
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=1310345225.28599.10.camel@debian \
--to=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael.fu@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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