public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
To: Paul Menage <menage@google.com>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>,
	Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>,
	a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Gautham shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] CPUSets: Move most calls to rebuild_sched_domains() to the workqueue
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 22:10:42 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48647652.5050001@qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6599ad830806261417u3015a9b2i6318841de866d768@mail.gmail.com>

Paul Menage wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Paul Menage <menage@google.com> wrote:
>> void get_online_cpus(void)
>> {
>>        might_sleep();
>>        if (cpu_hotplug.active_writer == current)
>>                return;
>>        down_read(&cpu_hotplug.lock);
>> }
>>
>> void put_online_cpus(void)
>> {
>>        if (cpu_hotplug.active_writer == current)
>>                return;
>>        up_read(&cpu_hotplug.lock);
>> }
>>
>> static void cpu_hotplug_begin(void)
>> {
>>        down_write(&cpu_hotplug.lock);
>>        cpu_hotplug.active_writer = current;
>> }
>>
>> static void cpu_hotplug_done(void)
>> {
>>        cpu_hotplug.active_writer = NULL;
>>        up_write(&cpu_hotplug.lock);
>> }
>>
>> I think that combined with moving the async rebuild_sched_domains to a
>> separate thread should solve the problem, but I'm wondering why
>> cpu_hotplug.lock was implemented this way in the first place.
> 
> Oh, I guess that doesn't work because of recursive calls to
> get_online_cpus(). Maybe we need a down_read_recursive() that skips
> ahead of waiting writers if the lock is already held in read mode?

Instead of changing cpu_hotplug locking should we maybe try to avoid using
cgroup_lock in rebuild_sched_domains() ?
There is a comment in cpuset.c that says
 * If a task is only holding callback_mutex, then it has read-only
 * access to cpusets.

I'm not sure if it's still valid. rebuild_sched_domains() only needs read only
access, it does not really modify any cpuset structures.

Max



  reply	other threads:[~2008-06-27  5:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-06-26  7:56 [RFC][PATCH] CPUSets: Move most calls to rebuild_sched_domains() to the workqueue Paul Menage
2008-06-26  9:34 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-06-26  9:50   ` Paul Menage
2008-06-26 18:49     ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-26 19:19       ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-26 20:34       ` Paul Menage
2008-06-26 21:17         ` Paul Menage
2008-06-27  5:10           ` Max Krasnyansky [this message]
2008-06-27  5:51             ` Paul Menage
2008-06-27 17:31               ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-27  3:22 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2008-06-27  3:23   ` Gautham R Shenoy
2008-06-27  4:53     ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-27 16:42     ` 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=48647652.5050001@qualcomm.com \
    --to=maxk@qualcomm.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=menage@google.com \
    --cc=pj@sgi.com \
    --cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.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