Re: [GIT PULL] nohz: Full dynticks base interface

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:48:20AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/3/25 Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 06:12:12PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> 2013/3/25 Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >> > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 03:46:40PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >> >> 2013/3/24 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > * Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Hi Ingo,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> This settles the initial ground to start a special full dynticks tree in -tip
> >> >> >> that we can iterate incrementally to accelerate the development.
> >> >> >> It is based on tip:sched/core.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I tried to rearrange a bit the naming. We are probably not yet done with
> >> >> >> that but I guess we can fix it along with the rest.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Please pull from:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frederic/linux-dynticks.git
> >> >> >>       full-dynticks-for-mingo
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Changes on these commits since they were part of 3.9-rc1-nohz1:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> * Force a timekeeping CPU over the full dynticks range
> >> >> >> * Rename CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL to CONFIG_NO_HZ_EXTENDED
> >> >> >> * Following *_nohz_extended_* APIs renames
> >> >> >> * Handle CPU hotplug for timekeeping
> >> >> >> * Rename full_nohz= kernel parameter to nohz_extended=
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Note that boot parameters suck for pretty much any purpose but quirks -
> >> >> > please also add a (default off!) Kconfig option to easily enable
> >> >> > nohz_extended for all CPUs.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That way I will be able to test it automatically via randconfig and such.
> >> >>
> >> >> Sure, I'm adding such an option.
> >> >
> >> > Hmmm...  This would be an option to make all but one CPU an adaptive-ticks
> >> > CPU, right?  If so, this leads to the question of whether I should add a
> >> > matching no-CBs Kconfig option.  My guess is "no", because the existing
> >> > CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_ALL should work just fine -- there would be a CPU that
> >> > was not an adaptive-ticks CPU, but does have its RCU callbacks offloaded.
> >> >
> >> > Or am I missing something here?
> >>
> >> No that looks right. Now I wonder if I should select
> >> CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_ALL at the same time. Probably.
> >
> > Sounds like a good initial position to me.  If it somehow causes problems,
> > we can always change it later.
> 
> Ah "rcu: Provide compile-time control for no-CBs CPUs" is not yet in
> -tip so I can't do that yet. Ok for now I'm going to add
> CONFIG_NO_HZ_EXTENDED_ALL and will select the matching RCU config once
> it's visible upstream.

Good point...  I expect to be sending a pull request in a day or two.

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/