On Fri, 11 Jul 2014, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > That would imply that all no-nohz processors are housekeeping? So all > > processors with a tick are housekeeping? > > Well, now that I think about it again, I would really like to keep > housekeeping > to CPU 0 when nohz_full= is passed.
Yeah. > > Could we make that set configurable? Ideally I'd like to have the ability > > restrict the housekeeping to one processor. > > Ah, I'm curious about your usecase. But I think we can do that. And we should. The use case is pretty straightforward because we are trying to keep as much OS noise as possible off most processors. Processor 0 is the sacrificial lamb that will be used for all OS processing and hopefully all high latency operations will occur there. Processors 1-X have a tick but we still try to keep latencies sane. And then there is X-Y where tick is off. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
