On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 03:39:37PM -0700, John Stultz wrote: >> >> But otherwise both patches look great and are working well! >> >> Do you mind marking them both for stable 4.4+? > > OK, looks like it does qualify in the "fix a notable performance or > interactivity issue" category. > >> Tested-by: John Stultz <john.stu...@linaro.org> >> Acked-by: John Stultz <john.stu...@linaro.org> >> >> Also, do make sure Dmitry gets the reported-by credit for the first patch. > > Done! The updated first patch is below, and the second will follow.
So just as a heads up, while this patch *greatly* improved the situation, apparently the occasional 7ms spikes (again, much better then 80ms!) still seen are causing trouble when compared w/ the 4.1 or earlier kernels (which I think kept things sub-ms - Dmitry, please correct me). So I wanted to dampen my enthusiasm a touch for this, as there may yet further improvements needed. I'll try to get some more info on this as soon as I have details. thanks -john