Re: [PATCH 08/10] posix-cpu-timers: Migrate to use new tick dependency mask model

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 07:12:43PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 04:49:55PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Instead of doing a per signal dependency, I'm going to use a per task
> > one.
> 
> Urgh, does this mean you'll keep the horrid tick_nohz_task_switch()
> thing?

I thought I would drop it, but now that I think about it more, I think I
need to keep it because if we enqueue a posix timer to a sleeping task
and that task later wakes up, we must restart the tick, and that is only
possible with a check on context switch :-(

This current patchset removed the need for that with a global dependency
for posix timers: as long as there is one enqueued we keep the tick. But
Chris and Luiz fear that Tilera users have posix timers on housekeepers.
They also suggested we offline the posix timers. I fear it's going to be
a high overhead as it means polling on the target task context of execution.
Unless we move the task itself to housekeepers...
--
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/