Re: [PATCH 2/2] nohz: make nohz_full imply isolcpus

[Rik van Riel]

On 04/03/2015 03:20 PM, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 04/03/2015 01:42 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 12:24:08PM -0400, cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> It's not clear that nohz_full is useful without isolcpus also
>>> set, since otherwise the scheduler has to run periodically to
>>> try to determine whether to steal work from other cores.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> I think Rick has a similar patch.
> 
> I didn't see anything relevant in linux-next, though I did see
> cpu_isolated_map
> made into a public symbol in a recent commit by Rik.

I have a few patches in cgroups/for-4.1 as well that
export information about isolated and nohz_full cpus
in /sys/devices/system/cpu/

> Rik, what's the change you're proposing that's similar to this one? Thanks!

I don't have this particular one, and I like it.

I know there are use cases where isolcpus= without
nohz_full= makes sense, but I cannot think of the
reverse.

Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>

-- 
All rights reversed
--
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/