Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/1] hrtimers: Cache next hrtimer

[Ashwin Chaugule]

Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> > This looks very good ! Our results are almost similar now. However, I think
> > that with this new
> > patch we're still arming the timer needlessly at least once. This is the
> > case when we're trying to remove the first (oldest) hrtimer with
> > timer->expires = cpu->expires_next, but we forgo the reprogramming, when we
> > really shouldn't. At this point, with the current scheme of things, we will
> > needlessly wakeup and simply correct the expires_next value by
> > traversing up the rbtree, to the parent node.
> >     
>
> That only happens, when that timer is the last one in both trees. Then
> the resulting reprogramming value is KTIME_MAX and we skip the
> reprogramming. That's easy to fix by removing the KTIME_MAX check.
>  
>   
Hmm. Agreed. I'll fix this and send a patch in the next few days. Otherwise, I think all else looks good.


Cheers,
Ashwin

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/