Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/nohz: Optimize get_nohz_timer_target()
In-Reply-To: <CANRm+Cw1eTNgB1r79J7U__ynio7pMSR4Xa35XuQuj-JKAQGxmg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Jan 2020 15:12:52 +0100
Message-ID: <87a76v8knv.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Wanpeng,

Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Thomas,
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 16:29, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2019, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> > I didn't see your refactor to get_nohz_timer_target() which you
>> > mentioned in IRC after four months, I can observe cyclictest drop from
>> > 4~5us to 8us in kvm guest(we offload the lapic timer emulation to
>> > housekeeping cpu to avoid timer fire external interrupt on the pCPU
>> > which vCPU resident incur a vCPU vmexit) w/o this patch in the case of
>> > there is no busy housekeeping cpu. The score can be recovered after I
>> > give stress to create a busy housekeeping cpu.
>> >
>> > Could you consider applying this patch for temporary since I'm not
>> > sure when the refactor can be ready.
>>
>> Yeah. It's delayed (again).... Will pick that up.
>
> I didn't find WIP tag for this work after ~half year since v4 was
> posted https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/6/28/231 Could you apply this patch
> for temporary because the completion time of refactor is not
> deterministic.

Could you please repost it?

Thanks,

        tglx