Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933377Ab0LUAOD (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Dec 2010 19:14:03 -0500 Received: from mail-fx0-f66.google.com ([209.85.161.66]:47431 "EHLO mail-fx0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757676Ab0LUAOB (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Dec 2010 19:14:01 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=dMiBCb1kuTrdfs3GWrwAHFrX96IQmBH6v9qnroS9kNrH1hYF0hcEE8zy8Xbvk92FJu Gu3VlJl+ycJaSVpHHM5jOhP+VepFXKjTwo83sBZyd6zwfEhrzQS5B5WrU9Hjjsz/tcC2 20ORYzLoHADs8NhWgfXc/1OT43IqwCe2LjBnk= Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 01:13:56 +0100 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: LKML , Thomas Gleixner , "Paul E. McKenney" , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt , Lai Jiangshan , Andrew Morton , Anton Blanchard , Tim Pepper Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/15] nohz_task: Avoid nohz task cpu as non-idle timer target Message-ID: <20101221001354.GG1715@nowhere> References: <1292858662-5650-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1292858662-5650-3-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1292860078.5021.6.camel@laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1292860078.5021.6.camel@laptop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1065 Lines: 26 On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 04:47:58PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 16:24 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > Unbound timers are preferably targeted for non idle cpu. If > > possible though, prioritize idle cpus over nohz task cpus, > > because the main point of nohz task is to avoid unnecessary > > timer interrupts. > > Oh is it? > > I'd very much expect the cpu that arms the timer to get the interrupt. I > mean, if the task doesn't want to get interrupted by timers, > _DON'T_USE_TIMERS_ to begin with. > > So no, don't much like this at all. I suspect TIMER_NOT_PINNED has been introduced to save some power by avoiding to wake up idle cpus. This is used by mod_timer(), schedule_timeout(), mod_timer_pending() So that's widely used and removing that could have a deep impact on power. -- 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/