From: Max Krasnyanskiy <maxk@qualcomm.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>,
mingo@elte.hu, peterz@infradead.org, menage@google.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Subject: Re: [patch] sched: prevent bound kthreads from changing cpus_allowed
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:59:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <484D99AD.4000306@qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0806051357480.32537@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
David Rientjes wrote:
>> 2) Sometimes calls to kthread_bind are binding to any online cpu, such as in:
>>
>> drivers/infiniband/hw/ehca/ehca_irq.c: kthread_bind(cct->task, any_online_cpu(cpu_online_map));
>>
>> In such cases, the PF_THREAD_BOUND seems inappropriate. The caller of
>> kthread_bind() really doesn't seem to care where that thread is bound;
>> they just want it on a CPU that is still online.
>>
>
> This particular case is simply moving the thread to any online cpu so that
> it survives long enough for the subsequent kthread_stop() in
> destroy_comp_task(). So I don't see a problem with this instance.
>
> A caller to kthread_bind() can always remove PF_THREAD_BOUND itself upon
> return, but I haven't found any cases in the tree where that is currently
> necessary. And doing that would defeat the semantics of kthread_bind()
> where these threads are supposed to be bound to a specific cpu and not
> allowed to run on others.
Actually I have another use case here. Above example in particular may be ok
but it does demonstrate the issue nicely. Which is that in some cases kthreads
are bound to a CPU but do not have a strict "must run here" requirement and
could be moved if needed.
For example I need an ability to move workqueue threads. Workqueue threads do
kthread_bind().
So how about we add something like kthread_bind_strict() which would set
PF_THREAD_BOUND ?
We could also simply add flags argument to the kthread_bind() which would be
better imo but requires more changes. ie It'd look like
kthread_bind(..., cpu, KTHREAD_BIND_STRICT);
Things like migration threads, stop machine, etc would use the strict version
and everything else would use non-strict bind.
---
On the related note (this seems like the right crowd :). What do people think
about kthreads and cpusets in general. We currently have a bit of a disconnect
in the logic.
1. kthreads can be put into a cpuset at which point their cpus_allowed mask is
updated properly
2. kthread's cpus_allowed mask is updated properly when cpuset setup changes
(cpus added, removed, etc).
3. kthreads inherit cpuset from a parent (kthreadd for example) _but_ they
either do kthread_bind() or set_cpus_allowed() and both of those simply ignore
inherited cpusets.
Notice how scenario #3 does not fit into the overall picture. The behaviour is
inconsistent.
How about this:
- Split sched_setaffinity into
sched_setaffinity()
{
task *p = get_task_by_pid();
return task_setaffinity(p);
}
task_setaffinity(task, cpumask, flags)
{
if (flags & FORCE) {
// Used for kthreads that require strict binding.
// Detach the task from the current cpuset
// and put it into the root cpuset.
// Set PF_THREAD_BOUND.
}
// Rest of the original sched_setaffinity logic
}
- Have kthreads call task_setaffinity() instead of set_cpus_allowed() directly.
That way the behaviour will be consistent across the board.
Comments ?
Max
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-09 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-05 19:57 [patch] sched: prevent bound kthreads from changing cpus_allowed David Rientjes
2008-06-05 20:29 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-05 21:12 ` David Rientjes
2008-06-09 20:59 ` Max Krasnyanskiy [this message]
2008-06-09 22:07 ` David Rientjes
2008-06-10 4:23 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-10 17:04 ` David Rientjes
2008-06-10 16:30 ` cpusets and kthreads, inconsistent behaviour Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-10 18:47 ` David Rientjes
2008-06-10 20:44 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-10 20:54 ` David Rientjes
2008-06-10 21:15 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-10 6:44 ` [patch] sched: prevent bound kthreads from changing cpus_allowed Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-10 15:38 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-10 17:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-06-10 17:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-10 20:24 ` workqueue cpu affinity Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-11 6:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-11 19:02 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-12 18:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-12 19:10 ` Max Krasnyanskiy
2008-06-11 16:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-06-11 19:21 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-11 19:21 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-12 16:35 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-06-11 20:44 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-10 18:00 ` [patch] sched: prevent bound kthreads from changing cpus_allowed Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-05 20:52 ` Daniel Walker
2008-06-05 21:47 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-10 10:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-10 17:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=484D99AD.4000306@qualcomm.com \
--to=maxk@qualcomm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).