Re: [PATCH 0/2] nohz_full: Offload task_tick to remote housekeeping cpus for nohz_full cpus

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Thu Aug 13 2015 - 11:05:57 EST

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 02:44:02PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 02:22:23PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 02:55:36PM +0530, Vatika Harlalka wrote:
> > > This patchset is for offloading task_tick() to a remote housekeeping
> > > cpu. The larger aim is to stop ticks on nohz_full cpus. For this, extra
> > > work must be done by housekeeping cpus. So, task_tick is called from a
> > > delayed workqueue for nohz_full cpus and the work is requeued every second
> > > for those nohz_full cpus whose ticks are stopped while they are busy. In
> > > the rest of the cases it will lead to redundant accounting. To facilitate
> > > this, a new function tick_nohz_remote_tick_stopped is added to indicate
> > > whether ticks are stopped on a remote cpu.
> > > Tick related code in core.c is moved to tick.c
> >
> > *sigh* of course you didn't read what I've written on this topic..
> What is it? Note Vatika wrote this after my suggestion, so if there is an issue,
> I'm likely the responsible :-) But I don't recall you opposed to this solution.

*sigh* of course you _could_ all use Google yourselves.


I see nothing like the stuff I asked for in here, on top it creates the
stupid tick.c file.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at