Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] nohz: Use sysidle detection to let the timekeepersleep

[Alex Shi]

On 12/18/2013 06:51 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> So this is what this series brings, more details following:
> 
> * Some code, naming and whitespace cleanups
> 
> * Allow all CPUs outside the nohz_full range to handle the timekeeping
>   duty, not just CPU 0. Balancing the timekeeping duty should improve
>   powersavings.

If the system just has one nohz_full cpu running, it will need another
cpu to do timerkeeper job. Then the system roughly needs 2 cpu living.
>From powersaving POV, that is not good compare to normal nohz idle.
> 
> * Let the timekeeper (including CPU 0) sleep when its duty is
>   handed over to another CPU
> 
> * Allow timekeeper to sleep when all full dynticks CPUs are sleeping
>   (plug nohz to RCU sysidle detection)

Thanks Fredic!
It is much better on powersaving POV compare to current nohz_full. :)
> 
> * Wake up timekeeper with an IPI when full dynticks CPUs exit sysidle
>   state
> 
> * Wake up CPU 0 when a secondary timekeeper is offlined so that its
>   duty gets migrated


-- 
Thanks
    Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/