Re: [PATCH 2/2] nohz: make nohz_full imply isolcpus
From: Rik van Riel
Date: Sat Apr 04 2015 - 10:10:55 EST
On 04/03/2015 03:20 PM, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 04/03/2015 01:42 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 12:24:08PM -0400, cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> It's not clear that nohz_full is useful without isolcpus also
>>> set, since otherwise the scheduler has to run periodically to
>>> try to determine whether to steal work from other cores.
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> I think Rick has a similar patch.
> I didn't see anything relevant in linux-next, though I did see
> made into a public symbol in a recent commit by Rik.
I have a few patches in cgroups/for-4.1 as well that
export information about isolated and nohz_full cpus
> Rik, what's the change you're proposing that's similar to this one? Thanks!
I don't have this particular one, and I like it.
I know there are use cases where isolcpus= without
nohz_full= makes sense, but I cannot think of the
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
All rights reversed
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/