[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 4/5] locking/qspinlock: Introduce starvation avoidance into CNA

> On Jan 25, 2020, at 6:19 AM, Peter Zijlstra <> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 01:19:05PM -0500, Alex Kogan wrote:
>> Is there a lightweight way to identify such a “prioritized” thread?
> No; people might for instance care about tail latencies between their
> identically spec'ed worker tasks.

I would argue that those users need to tune/reduce the intra-node handoff
threshold for their needs. Or disable CNA altogether.

In general, Peter, seems like you are not on board with the way Longman
suggested to handle prioritized threads. Am I right?

— Alex

 \ /
  Last update: 2020-01-30 23:07    [W:0.281 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site