On 2014/03/19, 1:55 PM, "Peter Zijlstra" <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 07:44:29PM +0000, Dilger, Andreas wrote: >> The original reason for l_wait_event() not using TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE >> is to avoid the load on the server continually being >>"num_service_threads" >> regardless of whether they are actually doing something or not. We >> added various cases for periodic wakeups and such afterward. > >Hmm, maybe we should finally do the TASK_IDLE thing; > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/11/12/710 That looks pretty interesting, and appears to do what we need. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Lustre Software Architect Intel High Performance Data Division -- 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/
