public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dinakar Guniguntala <dino@in.ibm.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>, Simon Derr <Simon.Derr@bull.net>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	lsetech <lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
	Matthew Dobson <colpatch@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Dynamic sched domains aka Isolated cpusets
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:30:22 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050419080021.GA3963@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42644646.3030104@yahoo.com.au>

On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:44:06AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Very good, I was wondering when someone would try to implement this ;)

Thank you for the feedback !

> >-static void __devinit arch_init_sched_domains(void)
> >+static void attach_domains(cpumask_t cpu_map)
> > {
> 
> This shouldn't be needed. There should probably just be one place that
> attaches all domains. It is a bit difficult to explain what I mean when
> you have 2 such places below.
> 

Can you explain a bit more, not sure I understand what you mean

> Interface isn't bad. It would seem to be able to handle everything, but
> I think it can be made a bit simpler.
> 
> 	fn_name(cpumask_t span1, cpumask_t span2)
> 
> Yeah? The change_map is implicitly the union of the 2 spans. Also I don't
> really like the name. It doesn't rebuild so much as split (or join). I
> can't think of anything good off the top of my head.

Yeah agreed. It kinda lived on from earlier versions I had

> 
> >+	unsigned long flags;
> >+	int i;
> >+
> >+	local_irq_save(flags);
> >+
> >+	for_each_cpu_mask(i, change_map)
> >+		spin_lock(&cpu_rq(i)->lock);
> >+
> 
> Locking is wrong. And it has changed again in the latest -mm kernel.
> Please diff against that.
> 

I havent looked at the RCU sched domain changes as yet, but I put this in
to address some problems I noticed during stress testing.
Basically with the current hotplug code, it is possible to have a scenario
like this

         rebuild domains                  load balance
                |                               |
                |                     take existing sd pointer
                |                               |
     attach to dummy domain                     |
                |                     loop thro sched groups
     change sched group info                    |
                                      access invalid pointer and panic


> >+	if (!cpus_empty(span1))
> >+		build_sched_domains(span1);
> >+	if (!cpus_empty(span2))
> >+		build_sched_domains(span2);
> >+
> 
> You also can't do this - you have to 'offline' the domains first before
> building new ones. See the CPU hotplug code that handles this.
> 

By offline if you mean attach to dummy domain, see above

> This makes a hotplug event destroy your nicely set up isolated domains,
> doesn't it?
> 
> This looks like the most difficult problem to overcome. It needs some
> external information to redo the cpuset splits at cpu hotplug time.
> Probably a hotplug handler in the cpusets code might be the best way
> to do that.

Yes I am aware of this. What I have in mind is for the hotplug code
from scheduler to call into cpusets code. This will just return say 1
when cpusets is not compiled in and the sched code can continue to do
what it is doing right now, else the cpusets code will find the leaf 
cpuset that contains the hotplugged cpu and rebuild the domains accordingly
However the question still remains as to how cpusets should handle 
this hotplugged cpu

	-Dinakar

  reply	other threads:[~2005-04-19  7:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-07  0:51 [RFC PATCH] scheduler: Dynamic sched_domains Matthew Dobson
2004-10-07  2:13 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-07 17:01   ` Jesse Barnes
2004-10-08  5:55     ` [Lse-tech] " Takayoshi Kochi
2004-10-08  6:08       ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-08 16:43         ` Jesse Barnes
2004-10-07 21:58   ` Matthew Dobson
2004-10-08  0:22     ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-07 22:20   ` Matthew Dobson
2004-10-07  4:12 ` [ckrm-tech] " Marc E. Fiuczynski
2004-10-07  5:35   ` Paul Jackson
2004-10-07 22:06   ` Matthew Dobson
2004-10-07  9:32 ` Paul Jackson
2004-10-08 10:14 ` [Lse-tech] " Erich Focht
2004-10-08 10:40   ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-08 15:50     ` [ckrm-tech] " Hubertus Franke
2004-10-08 22:48       ` Matthew Dobson
2004-10-08 18:54     ` Matthew Dobson
2004-10-08 21:56       ` Peter Williams
2004-10-08 22:52         ` Matthew Dobson
2004-10-08 23:13       ` Erich Focht
2004-10-08 23:50         ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-10 12:25           ` Erich Focht
2004-10-08 22:51     ` Erich Focht
2004-10-09  1:05       ` Matthew Dobson
2004-10-10 12:45         ` Erich Focht
2004-10-12 22:45           ` Matthew Dobson
2004-10-08 18:45   ` Matthew Dobson
2005-04-18 20:26 ` [RFC PATCH] Dynamic sched domains aka Isolated cpusets Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-04-18 23:44   ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-19  8:00     ` Dinakar Guniguntala [this message]
2005-04-19  5:54   ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-19  6:19     ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-19  6:59       ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-19  7:09         ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-19  7:25           ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-19  7:28           ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-19  7:19       ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-19  7:57         ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-19 20:34           ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-23 23:26             ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-26  0:52               ` Matthew Dobson
2005-04-26  0:59                 ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-19  9:52       ` Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-04-19 15:26         ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-20  7:37           ` Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-04-19 20:42         ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-19  8:12     ` Simon Derr
2005-04-19 16:19       ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-19  9:34     ` [Lse-tech] " Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-04-19 17:23       ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-20  7:16         ` Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-04-20 19:09           ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-21 16:27             ` Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-04-22 21:26               ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-23  7:24                 ` Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-04-23 22:30               ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-25 11:53                 ` Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-04-25 14:38                   ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-21 17:31   ` [RFC PATCH] Dynamic sched domains aka Isolated cpusets (v0.2) Dinakar Guniguntala
2005-04-22 18:50     ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-22 21:37       ` Paul Jackson
2005-04-23  3:11     ` Paul Jackson

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=20050419080021.GA3963@in.ibm.com \
    --to=dino@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=Simon.Derr@bull.net \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=colpatch@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=pj@sgi.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