From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tang Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH] Update sched_domains_numa_masks when new cpus are onlined. Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:39:40 +0800 Message-ID: <5061196C.8090702@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <1347963128-25942-1-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> <1348479536.11847.25.camel@twins> <50602E75.1010304@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <50602E75.1010304@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-numa-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-numa@vger.kernel.org, wency@cn.fujitsu.com, mingo@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner On 09/24/2012 05:57 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > On 09/24/2012 03:08 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> + hotcpu_notifier(sched_domains_numa_masks_update, CPU_PRI_SCHED_ACTIVE); >>> hotcpu_notifier(cpuset_cpu_active, CPU_PRI_CPUSET_ACTIVE); >>> hotcpu_notifier(cpuset_cpu_inactive, CPU_PRI_CPUSET_INACTIVE); >> >> OK, so you really want your notifier to run before cpuset_cpu_active >> because otherwise you get that crash, yet you fail with the whole order >> thing.. You should not _ever_ rely on registration order. >> > > IMHO he isn't relying on registration order.. He uses the CPU_PRI_SCHED_ACTIVE > priority to ensure that the ordering of callbacks is right, isn't it? Yes, that's right. Thanks. :) > > Regards, > Srivatsa S. Bhat > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >