Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1237410
| From | Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 06/11] nohz: task_isolation: allow tick to be fully disabled |
| Date | 2015-10-01 15:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qeLMu-53B-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qdNx0-23T-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <qdNx0-23T-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <qdNx0-23T-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 04:40:56PM -0400, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@ezchip.com> wrote: > > While the current fallback to 1-second tick is still helpful for > > maintaining completely correct kernel semantics, processes using > > prctl(PR_SET_TASK_ISOLATION) semantics place a higher priority on > > running completely tickless, so don't bound the time_delta for such > > processes. In addition, due to the way such processes quiesce by > > waiting for the timer tick to stop prior to returning to userspace, > > without this commit it won't be possible to use the task_isolation > > mode at all. > > > > Removing the 1-second cap was previously discussed (see link > > below) and Thomas Gleixner observed that vruntime, load balancing > > data, load accounting, and other things might be impacted. > > Frederic Weisbecker similarly observed that allowing the tick to > > be indefinitely deferred just meant that no one would ever fix the > > underlying bugs. However it's at least true that the mode proposed > > in this patch can only be enabled on a nohz_full core by a process > > requesting task_isolation mode, which may limit how important it is > > to maintain scheduler data correctly, for example. > > What goes wrong when a task enables this? Presumably either tasks > that enable it experience problems or performance issues or it should > always be enabled. We need to make the scheduler resilient to 0Hz tick. Currently it doesn't even correctly support 1Hz or any dynticks behaviour that isn't idle. See update_cpu_load_active() for exemple. > > One possible issue: __vdso_clock_gettime with any of the COARSE clocks > as well as __vdso_time will break if the timekeeping code doesn't run > somewhere with reasonable frequency on some core. Hopefully this > always works. > > --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH v7 06/11] nohz: task_isolation: allow tick to be fully disabled Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2015-09-28 22:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v7 06/11] nohz: task_isolation: allow tick to be fully disabled Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 15:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v7 06/11] nohz: task_isolation: allow tick to be fully disabled Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2015-10-01 16:20 +0200
csiph-web