On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 19:18 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 27 November 2012 18:56, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > A couple of things. The sched_select_cpu() is not cheap. It has a double
> > loop of domains/cpus looking for a non idle cpu. If we have 1024 CPUs,
> > and we are CPU 1023 and all other CP
Hello,
We are using ARM foundation models for evaluation of ARMv8 architecture.
We are able to boot the prebuilt images as provided and directed by Linaro on
the following link.
http://www.linaro.org/engineering/armv8/#tab1
But if we try to recompile the kernel as directed on following link
(ht
On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 15:55 +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 27 November 2012 14:59, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 19:18 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> On 27 November 2012 18:56, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >> > A couple of things. The sched_select_cpu() is not cheap. It has a do
On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 05:56:30 PM Julius Werner wrote:
> Many cpuidle drivers measure their time spent in an idle state by
> reading the wallclock time before and after idling and calculating the
> difference. This leads to erroneous results when the wallclock time gets
> updated by anoth
When the generic ftrace implementation modifies code for trace-points it
uses stop_machine() to call ftrace_modify_all_code() on one CPU. This
ultimately calls the ARM specific function ftrace_modify_code() which
updates the instruction and then does flush_icache_range(). As this
cache flushing onl
On 27 November 2012 16:04, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 15:55 +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>> On 27 November 2012 14:59, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 19:18 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> >> On 27 November 2012 18:56, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> >> > A couple of
On 27 November 2012 14:59, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 19:18 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 27 November 2012 18:56, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> > A couple of things. The sched_select_cpu() is not cheap. It has a double
>> > loop of domains/cpus looking for a non idle cpu. If we h
[ Added John Stultz ]
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 16:08 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Till now, we weren't migrating a running timer because with migration
> del_timer_sync() can't detect that the timer's handler yet has not finished.
>
> Now, when can we actually to reach to the code (inside __mod_time
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 16:08 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Workqueues queues work on current cpu, if the caller haven't passed a
> preferred
> cpu. This may wake up an idle CPU, which is actually not required.
>
> This work can be processed by any CPU and so we must select a non-idle CPU
> here.
>
On 27 November 2012 18:56, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> A couple of things. The sched_select_cpu() is not cheap. It has a double
> loop of domains/cpus looking for a non idle cpu. If we have 1024 CPUs,
> and we are CPU 1023 and all other CPUs happen to be idle, we could be
> searching 1023 CPUs before
On 27 November 2012 06:19, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Hi Tejun,
>
> On 26 November 2012 22:45, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 04:08:45PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
>> I'm pretty skeptical about this. queue_work() w/o explicit CPU
>> assignment has always guaranteed that the work item w
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 11:03 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:35:52PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 09:03 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> >
> > > If I understand correctly (though also suffering turkey OD), the idea is
> > > to offload work
12 matches
Mail list logo
