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, cmetc...@ezchip.com wrote: >>> From: Chris Metcalf <cmetc...@ezchip.com> >>> >>> 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 <cmetc...@ezchip.com> >> I think Rick has a similar patch. > > I didn't see anything relevant in linux-next, though I did see > cpu_isolated_map > 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 in /sys/devices/system/cpu/ > 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 reverse. Acked-by: Rik van Riel <r...@redhat.com> -- All rights reversed -- 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/
