From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] sched: Add a new lockless wake-from-idle implementation
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 10:38:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140213093800.GA6078@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <218b548b69479baa005af8a7b04a3abbea8ed6fa.1392252790.git.luto@amacapital.net>
* Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
> This is a strawman proposal to simplify the idle implementation, eliminate
> a race
>
> Benefits over current code:
> - ttwu_queue_remote doesn't use an IPI unless needed
Cool.
> - The diffstat should speak for itself :)
Neat!
> - Less racy. Spurious IPIs are possible, but only in narrow windows or
> when two wakeups occur in rapid succession.
> - Seems to work (?)
>
> Issues:
> - Am I doing the percpu stuff right?
> - Needs work on non-x86 architectures
Absolutely, and with the least amount of disruption possible, as
people are not very good at testing 'all' of them.
> - The !CONFIG_SMP case needs to be checked
Which also happens to be the default for half of all non-x86 arches.
> - Is "idlepoll" a good name for the new code? It doesn't have *that*
> much to do with the idle state. Maybe cpukick?
'cpukick', hands down.
> If this turns out okay, TIF_NEED_RESCHED could possibly be deleted as well.
Cool ...
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-13 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-11 20:23 Too many rescheduling interrupts (still!) Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-11 21:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-02-11 22:34 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-12 10:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-12 15:49 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-12 16:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-12 18:19 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-12 20:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-13 1:40 ` [RFC] sched: Add a new lockless wake-from-idle implementation Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-13 9:38 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2014-02-13 14:49 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-02-13 14:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-13 17:07 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-13 20:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-13 20:35 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-13 19:58 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-14 1:38 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-14 20:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-14 20:17 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-14 21:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-12 15:59 ` Too many rescheduling interrupts (still!) Frederic Weisbecker
2014-02-12 16:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-12 17:46 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-02-12 18:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20140213093800.GA6078@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=bitbucket@online.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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