Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1456827 > unrolled thread
| Started by | yunhong jiang <yunhong.jiang@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-05 02:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-08-05 22:30 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
The timer softirq on the RT kernel yunhong jiang <yunhong.jiang@linux.intel.com> - 2016-08-05 02:50 +0200
Re: The timer softirq on the RT kernel Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 04:40 +0200
Re: The timer softirq on the RT kernel yunhong jiang <yunhong.jiang@linux.intel.com> - 2016-08-05 22:30 +0200
| From | yunhong jiang <yunhong.jiang@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 02:50 +0200 |
| Subject | The timer softirq on the RT kernel |
| Message-ID | <s2BuN-mO-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi,Mike & Steven On https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/24/1178, the patch of "timers: do not raise softirq unconditionally" is reverted. Thanks for Steven's detailed comments, it's quite clear explained. I remember Mike has a patch trying to fix it but late abandoned. Do you still have any plan to work on this? Otherwise, I will have a try. Thanks --jyh
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 04:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s2Ddf-1xK-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1456827 |
On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 17:36 -0700, yunhong jiang wrote: > Hi,Mike & Steven > On https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/24/1178, the patch of "timers: > do not raise softirq unconditionally" is reverted. Thanks for > Steven's > detailed comments, it's quite clear explained. > I remember Mike has a patch trying to fix it but late > abandoned. Do you still have any plan to work on this? Otherwise, I > will have a try. Sebastian converted the lock to raw in -rt, so nohz_full now works without any extra hackery. -Mike
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | yunhong jiang <yunhong.jiang@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 22:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s2TUK-3Xw-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1456851 |
On Fri, 05 Aug 2016 04:36:23 +0200 Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 17:36 -0700, yunhong jiang wrote: > > Hi,Mike & Steven > > On https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/24/1178, the patch of > > "timers: do not raise softirq unconditionally" is reverted. Thanks > > for Steven's > > detailed comments, it's quite clear explained. > > I remember Mike has a patch trying to fix it but late > > abandoned. Do you still have any plan to work on this? Otherwise, I > > will have a try. > > Sebastian converted the lock to raw in -rt, so nohz_full now works > without any extra hackery. Hi, Mike, thanks for reply and the update. I still noticed timer softirq on my isolated CPUs, possibly something wrong on my environment. I will re-check it. Thanks --jyh > > -Mike
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web