From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: + kthread-numa-aware-kthread_create_on_cpu.patch added to -mm tree Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 12:44:11 -0800 Message-ID: <20110119124411.864d9d97.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <201012100044.oBA0ivp3016990@imap1.linux-foundation.org> <1293131522.2170.798.camel@laptop> <20110119120756.cd554fb1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1295468119.2653.2.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20110119201716.GH22288@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <1295468515.2653.4.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:43302 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751264Ab1ASUpE (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:45:04 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1295468515.2653.4.camel@edumazet-laptop> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Eric Dumazet Cc: Andi Kleen , Peter Zijlstra , davem@davemloft.net, dhowells@redhat.com, fenghua.yu@intel.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tj@kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 21:21:55 +0100 Eric Dumazet wrote: > Le mercredi 19 janvier 2011 __ 12:17 -0800, Andi Kleen a __crit : > > > > > > I wont discuss about a function _name_ Andrew. > > > > > > If nobody can chose one better than the one I chosed, what can I do ? > > > > kthread_create_node() would seem logical (with a node parameter) > > > > -Andi > > I already explained why I dont like this suggestion. > > 1) My plan was to later add cpu affinity. That would be called kthread_create_on_cpu() except whoops, this patch already took that. > 2) All users I converted want to create one kthread per cpu, not per > node. kswapd is a potential user. It would want one kthread per node.