Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754895AbYKJOma (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:42:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751220AbYKJOmV (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:42:21 -0500 Received: from nlpi025.sbcis.sbc.com ([207.115.36.54]:40136 "EHLO nlpi025.prodigy.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750873AbYKJOmU (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:42:20 -0500 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:38:42 -0600 (CST) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@quilx.com To: Peter Zijlstra cc: Frank Mayhar , Doug Chapman , mingo@elte.hu, roland@redhat.com, adobriyan@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel Subject: Re: regression introduced by - timers: fix itimer/many thread hang In-Reply-To: <1226089574.31966.85.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net> Message-ID: References: <1224694989.8431.23.camel@oberon> <1225132746.14792.13.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> <1225219114.24204.37.camel@oberon> <1225936715.27507.44.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> <1225969420.7803.4366.camel@twins> <1225984098.7803.4642.camel@twins> <1226015568.2186.20.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> <1226053744.7803.5851.camel@twins> <1226081448.28191.64.camel@bobble.smo.corp.google.com> <1226089574.31966.85.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Score: -2.6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1124 Lines: 22 On Fri, 7 Nov 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > The advantage is that the memory foot-print scales with nr_tasks and the > runtime cost is min(nr_tasks, nr_cpus) where nr_cpus is limited to the > cpus the process actually runs on, so this takes full advantage of > things like cpusets. Typically you want threads of a process to spread out as far as possible. The point of having multiple threads is concurrency after all. So this will deteriorate in the common cases where you want the full aggregate processing power of a machine to work on something. Timer processing is already a latency problem (isnt there some option to switch that off?) and a solution like this is going to make things worse. Can we at least somehow make sure that nothing significantly happens in a timer interrupt on a processor if the thread has not scheduled any events or not odone any system calls? -- 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/