On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 12:06:21PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 08:30 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > I suspect that removal of jiffies from the kernel will take a few stages,
> > with RCU being one of the laggards for awhile. Making RCU's state
> > machine depend wholly on process-based execution will take some care
> > and experimentation, especially for extreme and corner-case workloads.
> > For example, having RCU OOM the system just because a specific CPU was
> > unable to run some RCU kthread for an extended time is something to
> > be avoided. ;-)
>
> Tickless doesn't mean no timeouts or periodic timers. I think we will
> always have some sort of dynamic tick when needed. It will just be more
> event driven then something that goes off constantly.
As long as we don't end up replacing a single tick with multiple hrtimers
(or whatever), ending up with more overhead and disruption than we
started with. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
--
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.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
