On 06/11/2015 01:36 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> The tick dependency is evaluated on every irq. This is a batch of checks
> which determine whether it is safe to stop the tick or not. These checks
> are often split in many details: posix cpu timers, scheduler, sched clock,
> perf events. Each of which are made of smaller details: posix cpu
> timer involves checking process wide timers then thread wide timers. Perf
> involves checking freq events then more per cpu details.
>
> Checking these details every time we update the full dynticks state
> bring avoidable overhead.
>
> So lets evaluate these dependencies once on context switch. Then the
> further dependency checks will be performed through a single state check.
>
> This is a first step that can be later optimized by dividing task level
> dependency, CPU level dependency and global dependency and update
> each at the right time.
> +static void tick_nohz_full_update_dependencies(void)
> +{
> + struct tick_sched *ts = this_cpu_ptr(&tick_cpu_sched);
> +
> + if (!posix_cpu_timers_can_stop_tick(current))
> + ts->tick_needed |= TICK_NEEDED_POSIX_CPU_TIMER;
> +
> + if (!perf_event_can_stop_tick())
> + ts->tick_needed |= TICK_NEEDED_PERF_EVENT;
> +
> + if (!sched_can_stop_tick())
> + ts->tick_needed |= TICK_NEEDED_SCHED;
>
I see this getting kicked from task work and from ipi
context, but does it get kicked on task wakeup, when
we have a second runnable task on a CPU, but we decide
not to preempt the currently running task to switch to
it yet, but we will want to preempt the currently running
task at a later point in time?
--
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/
