Quoting Dave Martin (2013-05-22 11:22:36)
> Currently not. This partly depends on whether the target residency is
> supposed to be a hint about the rough order of magnitude of the expected
> idle period, or whether it's supposed to be a strict contract.
>
> In effect, I think it's a hint which st
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 02:08:29PM -0700, Sebastian Capella wrote:
> Thanks Liviu!
>
> Some comments below..
>
> Quoting Liviu Dudau (2013-05-21 10:15:42)
> > ... Which side of the interface are you actually thinking of?
>
> Both, I'm really just trying to understand the problem.
>
> > I don't
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:08:29PM +0100, Sebastian Capella wrote:
> Thanks Liviu!
>
> Some comments below..
>
> Quoting Liviu Dudau (2013-05-21 10:15:42)
> > ... Which side of the interface are you actually thinking of?
>
> Both, I'm really just trying to understand the problem.
>
> > I don't
On 22 May 2013 14:36, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:04:16PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
>> So, this is the clean draft for the idea I had.. (Naming is poor for
>> now):
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/timer.h b/include/linux/timer.h
>> index 8c5a197..ad00ebe 100644
>> --- a/
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 02:04:16PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> So, this is the clean draft for the idea I had.. (Naming is poor for
> now):
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/timer.h b/include/linux/timer.h
> index 8c5a197..ad00ebe 100644
> --- a/include/linux/timer.h
> +++ b/include/linux/timer.h
>
Sorry for being late in replying to your queries.
On 13 May 2013 16:05, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Which mechanism is migrating the timer away?
It will be the same: get_nohz_timer_target() which will decide target
cpu for migration.
> I have no objections to the functionality per se, but the prop
