From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751206AbaBQF0w (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Feb 2014 00:26:52 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:53678 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750851AbaBQF0v (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Feb 2014 00:26:51 -0500 Message-ID: <1392614801.5565.92.camel@marge.simpson.net> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] rcu: move SRCU grace period work to power efficient workqueue From: Mike Galbraith To: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Kevin Hilman , Tejun Heo , Lai Jiangshan , Zoran Markovic , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shaibal Dutta , Dipankar Sarma Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 06:26:41 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20140212182336.GD5496@localhost.localdomain> References: <1391197986-12774-1-git-send-email-zoran.markovic@linaro.org> <52F8A51F.4090909@cn.fujitsu.com> <20140210184729.GL4250@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20140212182336.GD5496@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:iRxeAjM5uVXxz+e/QZN80nLDzNPM6oc7xl4V6ytaO3x 6RlhgM1iwIVzM7VPSFcjYQnUKTliTUEfaP5GVfXOKwVMjXq95C LsMIhRYk/sFwx1Wj8diXJVDaOeGSGOZT8paN/i/eMtC8qqVcdE CXoiLGg4TTKGnNcJF5+z3er1mtDSfJJ5L3/ODNd4BOYbJzVWIO 0bGt/Cqx4h83+WIXZZmc5hY0w+oITaGTBJTjpfty3GdgOdk0Q2 HX/bBMRzS4qOU/bTKpSA0RMJiNjDAXIWacfrrcVrNb4cp978lh CR5UpIHG2UJiXK9YCN4qIvnQqz+N7Lp08+phyCb5pzu7DKTSeb AFKy5+RvKH7loGNPwZcIxIAZ38W+mtuYFoLXI4S/IVeR6L0rJy wYxtCcDm+35Bw== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 19:23 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:47:29AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 06:08:31PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > > > Acked-by: Lai Jiangshan > > > > Thank you all, queued for 3.15. > > > > We should also have some facility for moving the SRCU workqueues to > > housekeeping/timekeeping kthreads in the NO_HZ_FULL case. Or does > > this patch already have that effect? > > Kevin Hilman and me plan to try to bring a new Kconfig option that could let > us control the unbound workqueues affinity through sysfs. Handing control to the user seemed like a fine thing, so I started making a boot option to enable it. Forcing WQ_SYSFS on at sysfs decision spot doesn't go well, init order matters :) Post init frobbing required if you want to see/frob all unbound. -Mike