> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Metcalf [mailto:cmetc...@ezchip.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2015 9:17 AM > To: Mike Galbraith; Frederic Weisbecker > Cc: Jiang, Yunhong; Ingo Molnar; Peter Zijlstra; LKML; Vatika Harlalka; Thomas > Gleixner; Preeti U Murthy; Christoph Lameter; Paul E . McKenney > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] nohz: Affine unpinned timers to housekeepers > > On 09/02/2015 05:38 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > IMHO, nohz_full -> cpu_isolated_map removal really wants to happen. > > NO_HZ_FULL_ALL currently means "Woohoo, next stop NR_CPUS=0". > > Yeah, the problem seems to be folks who use it as a kind of > "hey, maybe this gives me some optimization boost somewhere" > kind of setting. Did we ever hear actual use cases for people who > benefited from running nohz_full on cpus with an active scheduler, > i.e. no isolcpus for that core? I find it hard to imagine, but, maybe...? >
I think they can use cpuset instead of isolcpus, like Viresh stated https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/14/199 . This patch in fact removes one gap between cpuset and isolcpus. Thanks --jyh N�����r��y����b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{����zX����ܨ}���Ơz�&j:+v�������zZ+��+zf���h���~����i���z� �w���?�����&�)ߢf��^jǫy�m��@A�a��� 0��h���i
