On Wednesday 20 November 2013 05:12 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Viresh, > > On Wed, 20 Nov 2013, Viresh Kumar wrote: > >> Migration of timers from idle cores to non-idle ones for power saving is very >> well working and really saves a lot of power for us. What's currently not >> working is the migration of running timers Or timers which re-arms >> themselves. >> >> There are complications with migrating timers which schedules themselves >> again >> from their handler. del_timer_sync() can't detect that the timer's handler >> yet has not finished. > > Because you try to violate the semantics of the existing code. There > is a reason why we enforce that running timers must be requeued on the > base they are running on. > > Now you try to duct tape it into submission. That's not going to fly. > > The timer wheel code is not designed to allow that and it has lots of > other short comings and historic burdens. I'm not going to accept more > duct tape and fragile hackery into that code. > > I'm already working on a complete replacement infrastructure, which > avoids all the short comings of the current timer implementation > including this one. > > It's going to be a massive effort to convert everything over to the > new infrastructure so we can kill the timer wheel, but that's less > scary and less risky than trying to add more fragility to the existing > code.
Thanks for the feedback. I Atleast know now that this patch doesn't have a future :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
