On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 09:02:40AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 06:35:24PM +0900, [email protected] wrote: > > From: Byungchul Park <[email protected]> > > > > i found do_timer accounts other than one tick, so i made > > update_cpu_load_active care that. > > > > is it intended because of its overhead? > > I think the idea was that the NO_HZ bits would deal with the other > cases.
watchers of this mail might have considered i didn't know about nohz;; because i did not explaned it in detail. it's my fault. i mentioned the global load update in the case of periodic tick.. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to [email protected] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
