From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756722Ab3IKSGB (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:06:01 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:52740 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753476Ab3IKSF7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:05:59 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:05:42 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Andi Kleen , Peter Anvin , Mike Galbraith , Thomas Gleixner , Arjan van de Ven , Frederic Weisbecker , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-arch , Len Brown , Vaidyanathan Srinivasan Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] sched: Add NEED_RESCHED to the preempt_count Message-ID: <20130911180541.GR31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20130910130811.507933095@infradead.org> <20130910132011.116593485@infradead.org> <522FCE9D.4010707@amacapital.net> <20130911082530.GN31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20130911110635.GT26785@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 09:35:08AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > I bet that this improves cross-cpu wakeup latency, too -- the old code > would presumably wake up the cpu and then immediately interrupt it. Yeah,. its what clued Mike in to there being a problem. > It might be nice to rename one or both of need_resched and > test_need_resched, though -- the difference is somewhat inscrutable. I agreed, I've just been unable to come up with anything sane. The best I could come up with is renaming {set,clear,test}_need_resched() to {}_tif_need_resched(), so we then end up with test_tif_need_resched(), which is slightly more different from need_resched(). Ideas?