From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <200510270228.j9R2SWg27777@unix-os.sc.intel.com> From: "Chen, Kenneth W" Subject: Weird schedule delay time for cache_reap() Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:28:32 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: I can't convince myself that the 2nd argument in schedule_delayed_work called from cache_reap() function make any sense: static void cache_reap(void *unused) { ... check_irq_on(); up(&cache_chain_sem); drain_remote_pages(); /* Setup the next iteration */ schedule_delayed_work(&__get_cpu_var(reap_work), REAPTIMEOUT_CPUC + smp_processor_id()); } Suppose one have a lucky 1024-processor big iron numa box, cpu0 will do cache_reap every 2 sec (REAPTIMEOUT_CPUC = 2*HZ). cpu512 will do cache_reap every 4 sec, cpu1023 will do cache_reap every 6 sec. Is the skew intentional on different CPU? Why different interval for different cpu#? - Ken -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org