On 23 April 2014 22:20, Max Krasnyansky wrote:
> On 04/22/2014 03:32 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> This vmstat interrupt is disturbing my core isolation :), have you got
>> any far with this patchset?
>
> You don't mean an interrupt, right?
Sorry for not being clear enough. I meant the interruption
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014, Max Krasnyansky wrote:
> The updates are done via the regular priority workqueue.
Yup so things could be fixed at that level with setting an additional
workqueue flag?
> I'm playing with isolation as well (has been more or less a background thing
> for the last 6+ years). Ou
Hi Viresh,
On 04/22/2014 03:32 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> V2->V3:
>> - Introduce a new tick_get_housekeeping_cpu() function. Not sure
>> if that is exactly what we want but it is a start. Thomas?
>> - Migrate the shepherd task if the o
On 22 April 2014 19:08, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Sorry no too much other stuff. Would be glad if you could improve on it.
> Should have some time on Friday to look at it.
Really busy with other activities for improving core isolation, doesn't look
like I will get enough time getting this done :
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > V2->V3:
> > - Introduce a new tick_get_housekeeping_cpu() function. Not sure
> > if that is exactly what we want but it is a start. Thomas?
> > - Migrate the shepherd task if the output of
>
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> V2->V3:
> - Introduce a new tick_get_housekeeping_cpu() function. Not sure
> if that is exactly what we want but it is a start. Thomas?
> - Migrate the shepherd task if the output of
> tick_get_housekeeping_cpu() changes.
> - Fixes re
On Sat, 16 Nov 2013, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Not really. Thomas suggested an infrastructure to move CPU-local periodic
> jobs handling to be offlined to set of remote housekeeping CPU.
As I said in my reply to that proposal this is not possible since the cpu
local jobs rely on cpu local oper
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 05:40:40PM +, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> V2->V3:
> - Introduce a new tick_get_housekeeping_cpu() function. Not sure
> if that is exactly what we want but it is a start. Thomas?
Not really. Thomas suggested an infrastructure to move CPU-local periodic
jobs handling to
Hmmm... This has been sitting there for over a month. What I can I do to
to make progress on merging this?
--
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.
V2->V3:
- Introduce a new tick_get_housekeeping_cpu() function. Not sure
if that is exactly what we want but it is a start. Thomas?
- Migrate the shepherd task if the output of
tick_get_housekeeping_cpu() changes.
- Fixes recommended by Andrew.
V1->V2:
- Optimize the need_update check by using
10 matches
Mail list logo
