From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752101AbdFOX0X (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jun 2017 19:26:23 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:51107 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751141AbdFOX0W (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jun 2017 19:26:22 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 01:26:19 +0200 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , peterz@infradead.org, oleg@redhat.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v2 0/2] swait: add idle to make idle-hacks on kthreads explicit Message-ID: <20170615232619.GS27288@wotan.suse.de> References: <87zid92ns2.fsf@xmission.com> <20170615184820.22994-1-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20170615215717.GI3721@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170615215717.GI3721@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 02:57:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:48:18AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > While reviewing RCU's interruptible swaits I noticed signals were actually > > not expected. Paul explained that the reason signals are not expected is > > we use kthreads, which don't get signals, furthermore the code avoided the > > uninterruptible swaits as otherwise it would contribute to the system load > > average on idle, bumping it from 0 to 2 or 3 (depending on preemption). > > > > Since this can be confusing its best to be explicit about the requirements and > > goals. This patch depends on the other killable swaits [0] recently proposed as > > well interms of context. Thee patch can however be tested independently if > > the hunk is addressed separately. > > > > [0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170614222017.14653-3-mcgrof@kernel.org > > Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney > > Are you looking to push these or were you wanting me to? I'd be happy for you to take them. Luis