Hello,

On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 11:37:22PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:

On 7 January 2013 20:34, Tejun Heo [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

The latter part "not using idle cpu just for processing work" does
apply to homogeneous systems too but as I wrote earlier work items
don't spontaneously happen on an idle core.  Something, including
timer, needs to kick it.  So, by definition, a CPU already isn't idle
when a work item starts execution on it.  What am I missing here?

We are talking about a core being idle from schedulers perspective :)

But it's not like cpu doesn't consume power if scheduler considers it
idle, right?  Can you please explain in detail how this contributes to
saving power?  Is it primarily about routing work items to lower power
CPUs?  And please don't point to presentation slides.  They don't seem
to explain much better and patches and the code should be able to
describe themselves.  Here, more so, as the desired behavior change
and the resulting powersave are rather subtle.

quoted

Yeah, this could be a better solution, I think.  Plus, it's not like
finding the optimal cpu is free.

Thanks for the first part (When i shared this idea with Vincent and Amit, i
wasn't sure at all about the feedback i will get from you and others, but i
am very happy now :) ).

I couldn't understand the second part. We still need to search for a free cpu
for this new routine. And the implementation would almost be same as the
implementation of queue_work() in my initial patch

I meant that enforcing lookup for the "optimal" cpu on queue_work() by
default would add overhead to the operation, which in cases (on most
homogeneous configs) would lead to overhead without any realized
benefit.

quoted

Let's start simple for now.  If we really need it, we can always add
more later.

:)
Agreed. But i liked the idea from steven, we can have two routines:
queue_work_on_any_cpu() and queue_work_on_cpus()

We can talk about specifics later but please try to *justify* each new
interface.  Please note that "putting work items to cpus which the
scheduler considers idle" can't really be justification in itself.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun