From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S966281AbdEOTON (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 15 May 2017 15:14:13 -0400
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:45335 "EHLO
        userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S964967AbdEOTOM (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 15 May 2017 15:14:12 -0400
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
From: Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@oracle.com>
Subject: [PATCH RESEND 0/1] sched/rt: minimize rq->lock contention in,
 do_sched_rt_period_timer()
Message-ID: <741689b4-2e37-bdfe-5953-bb954fe5c35a@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 14:13:09 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Peter, Ingo,

I sent this patch about a month ago and got no response.

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9684545/

Does it seem reasonable? I'm not sure if taking rt_runtime_lock is
strictly necessary, but it's a big improvement to taking rq->lock every
pass through the loop. Is there another way to fix this?

Thanks,
Shaggy