From: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
To: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mingo@elte.hu,
dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
pj@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu hotplug, sched: Introduce cpu_active_map and redoscheddomain managment (take 2)
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:52:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <487F9509.9050802@qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <487EFB71.BA47.005A.0@novell.com>
Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 3:16 AM, in message <487EF1E9.2040101@qualcomm.com>,
> Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com> wrote:
>
>> Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>> Well, admittedly I am not entirely clear on what problem is being solved as
>>> I was not part of the original thread with Linus. My impression of what you
>>> were trying to solve was to eliminate the need to rebuild the domains for a
>>> hotplug event (which I think is a good problem to solve), thus eliminating
>>> some complexity and (iiuc) races there.
>>>
>>> However, based on what you just said, I am not sure I've got that entirely
>>> right anymore. Can you clarify the intent (or point me at the original
>> thread)
>>> so we are on the same page?
>> Here is the link to the original thread
>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/7/11/328
>> And here is where Linus explained the idea
>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/7/12/137
>>
>> I'll reply to the rest of your email tomorrow (can't keep my yes open any
>> longer :)).
>>
>> Max
>
> Hi Max,
> Thanks for the pointers. I see that I did indeed misunderstand the intent of the patch.
> It seems you already solved the rebuild problem, and were just trying to solve the
> "migrate to a dead cpu" problem that Linus mentions as a solution with cpu_active_map.
Yes. btw they are definitely related, because the reason we were blowing away
the domains is to avoid "migration to a dead cpu". ie We were relying on the
fact that domain masks never contain cpus that are either dying or already dead.
> In that case, note that rq->rd->online already fits the bill, I believe. In a nutshell,
> rq->rd->span contains all the cpus within your disjoint cpuset, and rq->rd->online,
> contains the subset of rq->rd->span that are online. The online bit is cleared at the
> earliest point in cpu hotplug removal (DYING), and it is set at the very latest point on
> insertion (ONLINE). Therefore it is redundant with the cpus_active_map concept.
>
> I think the simplest solution is to make sure that we cpus_and against rq->rd->online
> before allowing a migration. This is how I intended the mask to be used, anyway. Its
> what the RT scheduler does. It sounds like we just need to touch up the few places
> in the CFS side that were causing those oops.
>
> Thoughts?
None at this point :). I need to run right now and will try to look at this
later today. My knowledge of the internal sched structs is definitely lacking
so I need to look at the rq->rd thing to have and opinion.
Thanx
Max
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-17 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-15 11:43 [PATCH] cpu hotplug, sched: Introduce cpu_active_map and redo sched domain managment (take 2) Max Krasnyansky
2008-07-15 11:49 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-07-15 11:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-15 11:57 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-07-15 12:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-15 15:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-15 12:45 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-07-15 15:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-16 8:57 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2008-07-16 20:29 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-07-16 21:55 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2008-07-16 12:12 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-07-16 21:44 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-07-17 2:51 ` [PATCH] cpu hotplug, sched: Introduce cpu_active_map and redosched " Gregory Haskins
2008-07-17 7:16 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-07-17 11:57 ` [PATCH] cpu hotplug, sched: Introduce cpu_active_map and redoscheddomain " Gregory Haskins
2008-07-17 18:52 ` Max Krasnyansky [this message]
2008-07-17 19:46 ` [PATCH] cpu hotplug, sched: Introduce cpu_active_map and redoscheddomainmanagment " Gregory Haskins
2008-07-18 11:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-18 12:22 ` [PATCH] cpu hotplug, sched:Introduce " Gregory Haskins
2008-07-22 5:10 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-07-22 14:06 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-07-22 14:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-22 14:17 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-07-22 14:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-22 14:45 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-07-22 19:32 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-08-11 13:11 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-08-11 21:57 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-07-18 11:30 ` [PATCH] cpu hotplug, sched: Introduce cpu_active_map and redo sched domain managment " Ingo Molnar
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=487F9509.9050802@qualcomm.com \
--to=maxk@qualcomm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com \
--cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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