From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756581Ab2FTO1m (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:27:42 -0400 Received: from e28smtp03.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.3]:34966 "EHLO e28smtp03.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756428Ab2FTO1l (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:27:41 -0400 Message-ID: <4FE1DDA0.8030004@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 19:56:40 +0530 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120424 Thunderbird/12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Peter Zijlstra , pjt@google.com, paul@paulmenage.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, rjw@sisk.pl, nacc@us.ibm.com, rientjes@google.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com, tj@kernel.org, mschmidt@redhat.com, berrange@redhat.com, nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, liuj97@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] CPU hotplug, cpusets, suspend/resume: Fixes, cleanups and optimizations References: <20120524141510.3692.64549.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <4FE199B6.2050803@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120620113917.GA1925@gmail.com> <4FE1DB88.9060405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <4FE1DB88.9060405@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit x-cbid: 12062014-3864-0000-0000-0000036AB181 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/20/2012 07:47 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > On 06/20/2012 05:09 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> * Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> >>> On 05/24/2012 07:46 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >>> >>>> Currently the kernel doesn't handle cpusets properly during >>>> suspend/resume. After a resume, all non-root cpusets end up >>>> having only 1 cpu (the boot cpu), causing massive >>>> performance degradation of workloads. One major user of >>>> cpusets is libvirt, which means that after a >>>> suspend/hibernation cycle, all VMs suddenly end up running >>>> terribly slow! >>>> >>>> Also, the kernel moves the tasks from one cpuset to another >>>> during CPU hotplug in the suspend/resume path, leading to a >>>> task-management nightmare after resume. >>>> >>>> Patch 1 fixes this by keeping cpusets unmodified in the >>>> suspend/resume path. But to ensure we don't trip over, it >>>> keeps the sched domains updated during every CPU hotplug in >>>> the s/r path. This is a long standing issue and we need to >>>> fix up stable kernels too. >>>> >>>> The rest of the patches in the series are mostly >>>> cleanups/optimizations. >>> >>> Hi Peter, >>> >>> Would you be taking these patches through -tip for 3.6? >> >> They are now in tip:sched/core. >> >> Note that I removed the Cc:stable tag - it's not a regression >> fix and such it is not eligible for immediate -stable backports. >> >> ( Once they are upstream and have been problem-free upstream for >> several weeks then *maybe* we could forward the first commit >> to -stable, as a super special exception. ) >> > > > OK, I get the point of allowing it to cook in the mainline for a > while before backporting to -stable and I totally agree with that, > but why so much of uncertainty about whether the first commit should > (eventually) even land in -stable or not? Distros have been struggling > to deal with this bug in userspace and have failed, and AFAIK they are > waiting for a proper kernel fix for this bug. Agreed, this is not a > regression per se, but isn't this bug critical enough to qualify for > -stable? > IOW, I was just wondering what that "super special exception" was all about ;-) Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat