Hi Jonathan
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Jonathan Davies
wrote:
>
>
> On 18/07/14 15:08, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 01:59:06PM +0100, Jonathan Davies wrote:
>>>
>>> The current implementation of idle_cpu only considers tasks that might be
>>> in the
>>> CPU's
Hi Jonathan
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Jonathan Davies
jonathan.dav...@citrix.com wrote:
On 18/07/14 15:08, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 01:59:06PM +0100, Jonathan Davies wrote:
The current implementation of idle_cpu only considers tasks that might be
in the
CPU's
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 05:56:36PM +0100, Jonathan Davies wrote:
> >If your softirq takes _that_ long its broken anyhow.
>
> Modern NICs can sustain 40 Gb/s of traffic. For network device drivers that
> use NAPI, polling is done in softirq context. At this data-rate, the
> per-packet processing
On 18/07/14 15:08, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 01:59:06PM +0100, Jonathan Davies wrote:
The current implementation of idle_cpu only considers tasks that might be in the
CPU's runqueue. If there's nothing in the specified CPU's runqueue, it will
return 1. But if the CPU is
On 18/07/14 15:08, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 01:59:06PM +0100, Jonathan Davies wrote:
The current implementation of idle_cpu only considers tasks that might be in the
CPU's runqueue. If there's nothing in the specified CPU's runqueue, it will
return 1. But if the CPU is
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 05:56:36PM +0100, Jonathan Davies wrote:
If your softirq takes _that_ long its broken anyhow.
Modern NICs can sustain 40 Gb/s of traffic. For network device drivers that
use NAPI, polling is done in softirq context. At this data-rate, the
per-packet processing
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 01:59:06PM +0100, Jonathan Davies wrote:
> The current implementation of idle_cpu only considers tasks that might be in
> the
> CPU's runqueue. If there's nothing in the specified CPU's runqueue, it will
> return 1. But if the CPU is doing work in the softirq context, it
The current implementation of idle_cpu only considers tasks that might be in the
CPU's runqueue. If there's nothing in the specified CPU's runqueue, it will
return 1. But if the CPU is doing work in the softirq context, it is wrong for
idle_cpu to return 1. This patch makes it return 0.
I
The current implementation of idle_cpu only considers tasks that might be in the
CPU's runqueue. If there's nothing in the specified CPU's runqueue, it will
return 1. But if the CPU is doing work in the softirq context, it is wrong for
idle_cpu to return 1. This patch makes it return 0.
I
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 01:59:06PM +0100, Jonathan Davies wrote:
The current implementation of idle_cpu only considers tasks that might be in
the
CPU's runqueue. If there's nothing in the specified CPU's runqueue, it will
return 1. But if the CPU is doing work in the softirq context, it is
10 matches
Mail list logo