Hi Thomas,
Please find patch v3 which makes only tick_do_timer_cpu to run deferral timer
wheel to reduce cache bouncing and let me know what you think.
Thanks,
Joonwoo
>From 0c91f82a0b43b247f1ed310212ef3aada7ccc9f7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Joonwoo Park
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 15:34:25
Hi Thomas,
Please find patch v3 which makes only tick_do_timer_cpu to run deferral timer
wheel to reduce cache bouncing and let me know what you think.
Thanks,
Joonwoo
From 0c91f82a0b43b247f1ed310212ef3aada7ccc9f7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Joonwoo Park joonw...@codeaurora.org
Date: Thu,
On 03/19/2015 05:10 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
On 09/23/2014 11:33 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Joonwoo Park wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+static struct tvec_base *tvec_base_deferral = _tvec_bases;
+#endif
In principle I like the idea of a deferrable wheel, but this
On 03/19/2015 05:10 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
On 09/23/2014 11:33 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Joonwoo Park wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+static struct tvec_base *tvec_base_deferral = boot_tvec_bases;
+#endif
In principle I like the idea of a deferrable wheel, but this
On 09/23/2014 11:33 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Joonwoo Park wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+static struct tvec_base *tvec_base_deferral = _tvec_bases;
+#endif
In principle I like the idea of a deferrable wheel, but this
implementation is going to go nowhere.
Hi Thomas,
To
On 09/23/2014 11:33 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Joonwoo Park wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+static struct tvec_base *tvec_base_deferral = boot_tvec_bases;
+#endif
In principle I like the idea of a deferrable wheel, but this
implementation is going to go nowhere.
Hi Thomas,
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 08:33:34PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Joonwoo Park wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > +static struct tvec_base *tvec_base_deferral = _tvec_bases;
> > +#endif
>
> In principle I like the idea of a deferrable wheel, but this
> implementation is going
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 08:33:34PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Joonwoo Park wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+static struct tvec_base *tvec_base_deferral = boot_tvec_bases;
+#endif
In principle I like the idea of a deferrable wheel, but this
implementation is going to go
On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Joonwoo Park wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +static struct tvec_base *tvec_base_deferral = _tvec_bases;
> +#endif
In principle I like the idea of a deferrable wheel, but this
implementation is going to go nowhere.
First of all making it SMP only is silly. The deferrable stuff
On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Joonwoo Park wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+static struct tvec_base *tvec_base_deferral = boot_tvec_bases;
+#endif
In principle I like the idea of a deferrable wheel, but this
implementation is going to go nowhere.
First of all making it SMP only is silly. The deferrable
When a deferrable work (INIT_DEFERRABLE_WORK, etc.) is queued via
queue_delayed_work() it's probably intended to run the work item on any
CPU that isn't idle. However, we queue the work to run at a later time
by starting a deferrable timer that binds to whatever CPU the work is
queued on which is
When a deferrable work (INIT_DEFERRABLE_WORK, etc.) is queued via
queue_delayed_work() it's probably intended to run the work item on any
CPU that isn't idle. However, we queue the work to run at a later time
by starting a deferrable timer that binds to whatever CPU the work is
queued on which is
12 matches
Mail list logo