On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 11:49:15AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > @@ -1013,11 +1016,20 @@ static int ipmi_thread(void *data)
> > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&(smi_info->si_lock), flags);
> > busy_wait = ipmi_thread_busy_wait(smi_result, smi_info,
> >
Hi!
> @@ -1013,11 +1016,20 @@ static int ipmi_thread(void *data)
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&(smi_info->si_lock), flags);
> busy_wait = ipmi_thread_busy_wait(smi_result, smi_info,
> _until);
> - if (smi_result
From: Corey Minyard
[ Upstream commit 340ff31ab00bca5c15915e70ad9ada3030c98cf8 ]
ipmi_thread() uses back-to-back schedule() to poll for command
completion which, on some machines, can push up CPU consumption and
heavily tax the scheduler locks leading to noticeable overall
performance
3 matches
Mail list logo