From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752485AbdFOXno (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jun 2017 19:43:44 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:43144 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750820AbdFOXnn (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jun 2017 19:43:43 -0400 Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:43:36 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: peterz@infradead.org, oleg@redhat.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v2 0/2] swait: add idle to make idle-hacks on kthreads explicit Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <87zid92ns2.fsf@xmission.com> <20170615184820.22994-1-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20170615215717.GI3721@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170615232619.GS27288@wotan.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170615232619.GS27288@wotan.suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 17061523-0024-0000-0000-0000029484D9 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00007239; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000212; SDB=6.00875347; UDB=6.00435816; IPR=6.00655435; BA=6.00005423; NDR=6.00000001; ZLA=6.00000005; ZF=6.00000009; ZB=6.00000000; ZP=6.00000000; ZH=6.00000000; ZU=6.00000002; MB=3.00015842; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2017-06-15 23:43:39 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 17061523-0025-0000-0000-00004466FB32 Message-Id: <20170615234336.GL3721@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-06-15_12:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1706150407 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 01:26:19AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 02:57:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:48:18AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > > While reviewing RCU's interruptible swaits I noticed signals were actually > > > not expected. Paul explained that the reason signals are not expected is > > > we use kthreads, which don't get signals, furthermore the code avoided the > > > uninterruptible swaits as otherwise it would contribute to the system load > > > average on idle, bumping it from 0 to 2 or 3 (depending on preemption). > > > > > > Since this can be confusing its best to be explicit about the requirements and > > > goals. This patch depends on the other killable swaits [0] recently proposed as > > > well interms of context. Thee patch can however be tested independently if > > > the hunk is addressed separately. > > > > > > [0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170614222017.14653-3-mcgrof@kernel.org > > > > Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney > > > > Are you looking to push these or were you wanting me to? > > I'd be happy for you to take them. OK, let's see if we can get some Acked-by's or Reviewed-by's from the relevant people. For but one example, Eric, does this look good to you or are adjustments needed? Thanx, Paul