public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tim Hockin <thockin@hockin.org>
To: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@au1.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org,
	rml@tech9.net
Subject: Re: CPU Hotplug: Hotplug Script And SIGPWR
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 23:08:44 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040121070844.GA31807@hockin.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040121103933.B3236@in.ibm.com>

On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 10:39:33AM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> > *Before* that happens, tasks that don't handle the signal should just
> > have their affinity changed to all cpus.
> 
> Currently, handle or not handle the signal, affinity is changed
> to all cpus for tasks that are bound only to the dying CPU.

OK, so lets assume this scenarion:

process A affined to cpu1
all other processes affined to 0xffffffff
cpu1 goes down
 - process A affined to 0xffffffff
hotplug "cpu1 removed" event
cpu1 comes back
hotplug "cpu1 inserted" event

Process A has now discarded useful potentially VALUABLE information, with no
way to retrieve it.  The hot plug scripts do not have enough information to
put things the way they were before.  I can't believe that anyone considers
this to be OK.

Userspace gave us EXPLICIT instructions, which we then violate.  By granting
affinity, we have made a contract with userspace.  Changing affinity without
userspace's direct instruction is wrong.

What about this:

We already can not handle unexpected CPU removals gracefully, correct?  So
we expect some user-provided notification, right?

So force userland to handle it before we give the OK to remove a CPU.

pid_t sys_proc_offline(int cpu)
{
	pid_t p;

	/* flag cpu as not schedulale anymore */
	dont_add_tasks_to(cpu);

	p = find_first_unrunnable(cpu);
	if (p)
		return p;

	take_proc_offline(cpu);
	return 0;
}
 
The userspace control can then loop on this until it returns 0.  Each time
it return a pid, userspace must try to handle that pid - kill it, 
re-affine it, or provide some way to suspend it.

Simpler yet:

int sys_proc_offline(int cpu, int reaffine)
{
	pid_t p;

	/* flag cpu as not schedulale anymore */
	dont_add_tasks_to(cpu);

	while ((p = find_first_unrunnable(cpu))) {
		if (reaffine)
			reaffine(p);
		else
			make_unrunnable(p);
	}

	take_proc_offline(cpu);
	return 0;
}

Less flexible, but workable.  I prefer the first.  Yes it's racy, but the
worst case is that you receive a pid that you don't need to handle (died or
re-affined already).

Anything that violates affinity without permission just is so WRONG.

  reply	other threads:[~2004-01-21  7:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20040116174446.A2820@in.ibm.com>
2004-01-20  5:44 ` CPU Hotplug: Hotplug Script And SIGPWR Rusty Russell
2004-01-20  6:33   ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20  6:43     ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20  6:52       ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20  7:11         ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20  7:30           ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20  7:45             ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20  7:54               ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20  8:14                 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20  8:29                   ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20  8:37                     ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20  8:43                       ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-21  4:06                         ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2004-01-21  4:14                           ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-21  5:09                             ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2004-01-21  7:08                               ` Tim Hockin [this message]
2004-01-21 15:07                                 ` Matthias Urlichs
2004-01-22  5:29                                 ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-21  7:09                             ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-21  7:31                               ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-21  7:42                                 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-21  8:11                             ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-21  5:07                           ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-20  8:41                   ` Stefan Smietanowski
2004-01-20  8:49                     ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20  9:12                       ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-21  0:00                 ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-20 23:51         ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-20  7:45     ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-20  8:37       ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20  9:29         ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2004-01-21  0:12         ` Rusty Russell
     [not found] <fa.f37o48p.1io5q5@ifi.uio.no>
     [not found] ` <fa.frjqvfo.170g8hq@ifi.uio.no>
2004-01-20 17:49   ` Andy Lutomirski
2004-01-21  4:33     ` Rusty Russell

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=20040121070844.GA31807@hockin.org \
    --to=thockin@hockin.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
    --cc=rml@tech9.net \
    --cc=rusty@au1.ibm.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    --cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
    /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