On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 12:42:53AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/12/30 Paul E. McKenney :
> > On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:43:25AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> 2012/12/21 Steven Rostedt :
> >> > On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> >> Let's imagine
On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 12:42:53AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2012/12/30 Paul E. McKenney paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:43:25AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2012/12/21 Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org:
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic
2012/12/30 Paul E. McKenney :
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:43:25AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> 2012/12/21 Steven Rostedt :
>> > On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> >> Let's imagine you have 4 CPUs. We keep the CPU 0 to offline RCU callbacks
>> >> there and to
2012/12/30 Paul E. McKenney paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:43:25AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2012/12/21 Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org:
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Let's imagine you have 4 CPUs. We keep the CPU 0 to
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:43:25AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2012/12/21 Steven Rostedt :
> > On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> Let's imagine you have 4 CPUs. We keep the CPU 0 to offline RCU callbacks
> >> there and to
> >> handle the timekeeping. We set
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:43:25AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
2012/12/21 Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org:
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Let's imagine you have 4 CPUs. We keep the CPU 0 to offline RCU callbacks
there and to
handle the timekeeping.
2012/12/21 Steven Rostedt :
> On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> Let's imagine you have 4 CPUs. We keep the CPU 0 to offline RCU callbacks
>> there and to
>> handle the timekeeping. We set the rest as full dynticks. So you need the
>> following kernel
>> parameters:
2012/12/21 Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org:
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Let's imagine you have 4 CPUs. We keep the CPU 0 to offline RCU callbacks
there and to
handle the timekeeping. We set the rest as full dynticks. So you need the
following kernel
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Frederic Weisbecker
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So this is a new version of the nohz cpusets based on 3.7, except it's not
> using
> cpusets anymore and I actually based it on the middle of the 3.8 merge window
> in order to get latest upstream full dynticks
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Hi,
>
Nice work Frederic!
> So this is a new version of the nohz cpusets based on 3.7, except it's not
> using
> cpusets anymore and I actually based it on the middle of the 3.8 merge window
> in order to get latest upstream full
Hi,
So this is a new version of the nohz cpusets based on 3.7, except it's not using
cpusets anymore and I actually based it on the middle of the 3.8 merge window
in order to get latest upstream full dynticks preparatory work: cputime
cleanups,
RCU user mode, context tracking subsystem, nohz
Hi,
So this is a new version of the nohz cpusets based on 3.7, except it's not using
cpusets anymore and I actually based it on the middle of the 3.8 merge window
in order to get latest upstream full dynticks preparatory work: cputime
cleanups,
RCU user mode, context tracking subsystem, nohz
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 19:32 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Hi,
Nice work Frederic!
So this is a new version of the nohz cpusets based on 3.7, except it's not
using
cpusets anymore and I actually based it on the middle of the 3.8 merge window
in order to get latest upstream full
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Frederic Weisbecker
fweis...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
So this is a new version of the nohz cpusets based on 3.7, except it's not
using
cpusets anymore and I actually based it on the middle of the 3.8 merge window
in order to get latest upstream full
14 matches
Mail list logo