Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752070Ab2FETvb (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2012 15:51:31 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:45012 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750879Ab2FETva (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2012 15:51:30 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,352,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="148585824" Message-ID: <4FCE6341.3080105@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 12:51:29 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Zijlstra CC: Thomas Gleixner , "Luck, Tony" , "Yu, Fenghua" , Rusty Russell , Ingo Molnar , H Peter Anvin , "Siddha, Suresh B" , "Mallick, Asit K" , linux-kernel , x86 , linux-pm , "Srivatsa S. Bhat" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86/cpu hotplug: Wake up offline CPU via mwait or nmi References: <1338833876-29721-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <1338842001.28282.135.camel@twins> <87zk8iioam.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <1338881971.28282.150.camel@twins> <3E5A0FA7E9CA944F9D5414FEC6C7122007727023@ORSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com> <1338912565.2749.9.camel@twins> <3E5A0FA7E9CA944F9D5414FEC6C7122007728081@ORSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com> <1338913190.2749.10.camel@twins> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F19300965@ORSMSX104.amr.corp.intel.com> <1338918625.2749.29.camel@twins> <1338925756.2749.36.camel@twins> In-Reply-To: <1338925756.2749.36.camel@twins> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 868 Lines: 21 On 6/5/2012 12:49 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 21:43 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> Vs. the interrupt/timer/other crap madness: >> >> - We really don't want to have an interrupt balancer in the kernel >> again, but we need a mechanism to prevent the user space balancer >> trainwreck from ruining the power saving party. > > What's wrong with having an interrupt balancer tied to the scheduler > which optimistically tries to avoid interrupting nohz/isolated/idle > cpus? ideally threaded interrupts are like this.. we really should push for more usage of such and it all falls into place -- 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/