From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Cody P Schafer <cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] workqueue: add new schedule_on_cpu_mask() API
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 12:30:29 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130809163029.GT20515@mtj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <520514FB.8060502@tilera.com>
Hello, Chris.
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 12:12:43PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> I could certainly make schedule_on_cpu_mask() do sanity checking,
> perhaps via a WARN_ON_ONCE() if offline cpus were specified, and
> otherwise just have it create a local struct cpumask that it and's
> with cpu_online_mask, suitably wrapping with
> get_online_cpus()/put_online_cpus(). (I'm not sure how to test if a
> cpu has ever been online, vs whether it's online right now.) I
I think you'll have to collect it from CPU_ONLINE of
workqueue_cpu_up_callback() and I think it probably wouldn't be a bad
idea to allow scheduling on CPUs which have been up but aren't
currently as that's the current rule for other interfaces anyway.
> don't want to unnecessarily slow down the existing
> schedule_on_each_cpu(), so perhaps the implementation should have a
> static schedule_on_cpu_mask_internal() function that is the same as
> my previous schedule_on_cpu_mask(), allowing schedule_on_each_cpu()
> to call it directly to bypass the checking.
Hmmm.... it's unlikely to make noticeable difference given that it's
gonna be bouncing multiple cachelines across all online CPUs.
> That said... I wonder if it might make sense to treat this API the
> same as other APIs that already take a cpu? schedule_work_on(),
> schedule_delayed_work_on(), and queue_delayed_work_on() all take a
> cpu parameter without API comment or validity checking;
> queue_work_on() just says "the caller must ensure [the cpu] can't go
> away". Does it make sense to just add a similar comment to
> schedule_on_cpu_mask() rather than make this API the first to
> actually do cpu validity checking?
Yeah, we've been lazy with the sanity check and I think it's a good
opportunity to add it. Let's worry about other paths later.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-09 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-06 20:22 [PATCH] mm: make lru_add_drain_all() selective Chris Metcalf
2013-08-06 20:22 ` [PATCH v2] " Chris Metcalf
2013-08-07 20:45 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-07 20:49 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] workqueue: add new schedule_on_cpu_mask() API Chris Metcalf
2013-08-07 20:52 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] mm: make lru_add_drain_all() selective Chris Metcalf
2013-08-07 22:48 ` [PATCH v2] " Cody P Schafer
2013-08-07 20:49 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] workqueue: add new schedule_on_cpu_mask() API Chris Metcalf
2013-08-09 15:02 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-09 16:12 ` Chris Metcalf
2013-08-09 16:30 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2013-08-07 20:49 ` [PATCH v5 " Chris Metcalf
2013-08-09 17:40 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-09 17:49 ` [PATCH v6 " Chris Metcalf
2013-08-09 17:52 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] mm: make lru_add_drain_all() selective Chris Metcalf
2013-08-07 20:52 ` [PATCH v5 " Chris Metcalf
2013-08-07 20:52 ` [PATCH v4 " Chris Metcalf
2013-08-12 21:05 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-13 1:53 ` Chris Metcalf
2013-08-13 19:35 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-13 20:19 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 20:31 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-13 20:59 ` Chris Metcalf
2013-08-13 21:13 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-13 22:13 ` Chris Metcalf
2013-08-13 22:26 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-13 23:04 ` Chris Metcalf
2013-08-13 22:51 ` [PATCH v7 1/2] workqueue: add schedule_on_each_cpu_cond Chris Metcalf
2013-08-13 22:53 ` [PATCH v7 2/2] mm: make lru_add_drain_all() selective Chris Metcalf
2013-08-13 23:29 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 23:32 ` Chris Metcalf
2013-08-14 6:46 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-14 13:05 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-14 16:03 ` Chris Metcalf
2013-08-14 16:57 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-14 17:18 ` Chris Metcalf
2013-08-14 20:07 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-14 20:22 ` [PATCH v8] " Chris Metcalf
2013-08-14 20:44 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-14 20:50 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-14 21:03 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-14 21:07 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-14 21:12 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-14 21:23 ` Chris Metcalf
2013-08-13 23:44 ` [PATCH v7 2/2] " Chris Metcalf
2013-08-13 23:51 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 21:07 ` [PATCH v4 " Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 21:16 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-13 22:07 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 22:18 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-13 22:33 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 22:47 ` Andrew Morton
2013-08-13 23:03 ` Tejun Heo
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=20130809163029.GT20515@mtj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
--cc=cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).