On 7 January 2013 18:58, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 15:28 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> I have another idea that we can try: >> >> queue_work_on_any_cpu(). > > I think this is a good idea. :) :) >> - the mask of cpus to schedule this work on >> OR >> - Sched Level (SD_LEVEL) of cpus to run it. > > I wouldn't give a mask. If one is needed, we could have a > queue_work_on_mask_cpus(), or something. I think the "any" in the name > should be good enough to let developers know that this will not be on > the CPU that is called. Fair Enough. > By default, I would suggest for cache locality, > that we try to keep it on the same CPU. But if there's a better CPU to > run on, it runs there. That would break our intention behind this routine. We should run it on a cpu which we think is the best one for it power/performance wise. So, i would like to call the sched_select_cpu() routine from this routine to get the suggested cpu. This routine would however would see more changes later to optimize it more. > Also, we could still add a debug option that > makes it always run on other CPUs to slap developers that don't read. I don't think we need it :( It would be a new API, with zero existing users. And so, whomsoever uses it, should know what exactly he is doing :) Thanks for your quick feedback. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
