Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756656AbbKRSuA (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2015 13:50:00 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:18813 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754613AbbKRSt7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2015 13:49:59 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,314,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="688706833" Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 09:03:08 -0800 From: Jacob Pan To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Morten Rasmussen , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Ingo Molnar , John Stultz , LKML , Arjan van de Ven , Srinivas Pandruvada , Len Brown , Rafael Wysocki , Eduardo Valentin , Paul Turner , jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] sched: introduce synchronized idle injection Message-ID: <20151118090308.26917747@yairi> In-Reply-To: References: <1447444387-23525-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <1447444387-23525-4-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <20151118083622.GA25217@gmail.com> <20151118103541.GE3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20151118122702.GA30184@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20151118124946.GF3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20151118140440.GB30184@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20151118065233.1a883987@yairi> <20151118150944.GC30184@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20151118071131.1136daab@yairi> Organization: OTC X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 866 Lines: 21 On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:21:27 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > Okay. But it does mean that the defeault idle period is 5 ticks > > > (50ms @ HZ=100) and not 5 ms > > correct. my reason is to scale with various HZ values. > > So for smaller HZ values we get longer disruption. That's well thought > out scaling. well it might be too long for embedded systems who uses 100HZ. Is there a better way to scale in sub tick level? My original thought was for smaller HZ value, I assume they care less about latency, so the idle injection period is proportional to what they set for HZ. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/