On Wednesday, March 14, 2018 4:49:39 PM CET Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:47:41AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> > > > > Prepare the scheduler tick code for reworking the idle loop to > > avoid stopping the tick in some cases. > > > > Move away the tick_nohz_start_idle() invocation from > > __tick_nohz_idle_enter(), rename the latter to > > __tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick() and define tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick() > > as a wrapper around it for calling it from the outside. > > > > Make tick_nohz_idle_enter() only call tick_nohz_start_idle() instead > > of calling the entire __tick_nohz_idle_enter(), add another wrapper > > disabling and enabling interrupts around tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick() > > and make the current callers of tick_nohz_idle_enter() call it too > > to retain their current functionality. > > Perhaps we should have a higher level description of what the patch does. > After all the low level part is already described in the diff. > > Ie: we are splitting the nohz idle entry call to decouple the idle time > stats accounting and preparatory work from the actual tick stop code, that > in order to later be able to delay the tick stop once we reach more > power-knowledgeable callers.
OK
