From: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Cc: heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, oleg@tv-sign.ru,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, ego@in.ibm.com, menage@google.com,
peterz@infradead.org, vegard.nossum@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] S390 topology: don't use kthread() for arch_reinit_sched_domains()
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:49:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <486938C1.90907@qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080630143334.66033f60.pj@sgi.com>
Paul Jackson wrote:
> Max wrote:
>> we either have to ... or change arch_init_sched_domains() to no destroy
>> current domains.
>
> I might be misreading this, but I doubt that just not destroying
> current domains is an option. Once any CPU goes on or off line, the
> only way back to the new correct sched domain configuration is via the
> rebuild_sched_domains() routine in kernel/cpuset.c.
>
Despite all the typos and missing words you read it correctly :). Here
is what I'm thinking.
When a CPU goes off line overall partitioning does not change we just
need to update current domains and remove the CPU that is no longer
available. When a CPU goes online it always ends up in the root cpuset,
which means it can be added to the first load-balanced sched domain.
In other words I'm thinking of simulating what rebuild_sched_domains()
would've done on hotplug events and calling partition_sched_domains()
directly from sched cpu hotplug code.
That way we can avoid cpuset/cgroup locking in that path.
Now, I haven't really looked into details. Maybe it's not feasible. In
which case Paul M.'s new locking scheme is the way to go.
Max
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-30 19:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-29 16:51 [PATCH 2/2] S390 topology: don't use kthread() for arch_reinit_sched_domains() Oleg Nesterov
2008-06-30 13:45 ` Heiko Carstens
2008-06-30 19:01 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-30 19:33 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-30 19:49 ` Max Krasnyansky [this message]
2008-06-30 20:28 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-30 20:47 ` Max Krasnyansky
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=486938C1.90907@qualcomm.com \
--to=maxk@qualcomm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--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