Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] cpu: pseries: Cpu offline states framework

From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Date: Fri Sep 25 2009 - 17:15:24 EST


On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 16:48 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 10:51 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 14:11 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > I still think its a layering violation... its the hypervisor manager
> > > that should be bothered in what state an off-lined cpu is in.
> > >
> > That's not how our hypervisor works.
>
> Then fix it?

Are you serious ? :-)

> CPU hotplug is terribly invasive and expensive to the kernel, doing
> hotplug on a minute basis is just plain crazy.
>
> If you want a CPU in a keep it near and don't hand it back to the HV
> state, why not use cpusets to isolate it and simply not run tasks on it?
>
> cpusets don't use stopmachine and are much nicer to the rest of the
> kernel over-all.

Gautham, what is the different in term of power saving between having
it idle for long periods of time (which could do H_CEDE and with NO_HZ,
probably wouln't need to wake up that often) and having it unplugged in
a H_CEDE loop ?

Ben.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/