On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 08:25 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 02:44:50PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> > Having 2 billions callbacks on one cpu would be problematic, I really
> > hope nobody relies on this ;)
>
> Fair point! ;-)
>
> But just making everything long makes it quite easy to analyze.
>
> > I guess the 10/infinity switch should be smarter.
> >
> > something like the following maybe :
> >
> > rdp->blimit = max(blimit, rdp->qlen >> 6);
> >
> > (if queue is big, dont wait to hit 10000 before allowing more items to
> > be handled per round)
>
> The -rt guys would not be amused. :-(
>
> But for non-realtime use, increasing rcutree.blimit either at boot or
> via sysfs could make sense. It is also likely that I will move callback
> processing to a kthread at some point, which would allow some additional
> flexibility.
>
Ah, I now realize the loop can exceed blimit, but is it true for BH
variant ? (Not really a problem for 3.6/3.7 kernels, but prior ones)
if (++count >= bl &&
(need_resched() ||
(!is_idle_task(current) && !rcu_is_callbacks_kthread())))
break;
I wonder if ksoftirqd should be included as well...
> Furthermore, it would be easy to have one default for non-rt and another
> for -rt, if that would help.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
> >
> > Please dont forget stable teams. (3.2 + )
>
> Added both, please see below!
>
Seems fine to me, thanks Paul !
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
