From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: fweisbec@gmail.com, cl@linux.com, riel@redhat.com,
rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tj@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: + kmod-remove-unecessary-explicit-wide-cpu-affinity-setting.patch added to -mm tree
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 01:32:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150707233226.GA3611@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <559c5c37.S4vYB5A6NQhb8Yx5%akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Well, sorry for noise.
Let me repeat that I agree with this change, but...
On 07/07, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Subject: kmod: remove unecessary explicit wide CPU affinity setting
>
> Not only useless it even breaks nohz full. The housekeeping work (general
> kernel internal code that user doesn't care much about) is handled by a
> reduced set of CPUs in nohz full, precisely those that are not included by
> nohz_full= kernel parameters. For example unbound workqueues are handled
> by housekeeping CPUs.
I still think this part of the changelog looks confusing and just wrong.
It is not that it breaks nohz full, unbound workqueues have nothing to
do with housekeeping_mask from the kernel pov. But yes, people can change
->cpumask and this can connect to housekeeping_mask.
Frederic, may I ask you to update the changelog? Although perhaps it was
just me who was confused...
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-07 23:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-07 23:09 + kmod-remove-unecessary-explicit-wide-cpu-affinity-setting.patch added to -mm tree akpm
2015-07-07 23:32 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2015-07-08 12:52 ` Frederic Weisbecker
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-08-14 20:49 akpm
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150707233226.GA3611@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.