From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0F322F6900 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 12:13:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761740031; cv=none; b=c1SJXX+H5N1mSDEbOg/g3abxM8CRTIdPCOdtP4VfHXXTM3BQKAlERdddl2Qn02rHGRnfWKd2VdxZ/Xbz7XSK0wtqbaxZv4nWfy3gNpWsvSiWJOqObBPzeZ4LxeSncsX5z2UtKmkETUTHkD4AL53jQNj2d2LA0WoAPtlrQO7MfeM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761740031; c=relaxed/simple; bh=/+GujrSsGiAjLCU1622acqoeslKR4CJn2Yy4gWDqG9c=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=FiV/QOWkYCj0+FPd014nzBWp/zdyvn3Y4P0hiVVAE4lk4M1f2GIDo6RsrvXDgRHE/94VYO0uh5HqKt1uotwTsInPk76sD+LnhEHLpj8jMcDyaoK+rsOFL4eQYv2oDQ66KJ10+I38x24dbTJoY85DoGLBC1ZgGIj9E/4syEE+PpE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=FNjg/KK3; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=GHI1xpu7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="FNjg/KK3"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="GHI1xpu7" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1761740027; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=esT651bRTLMfYO64YXGQAJOBt0V7qx7+gpXmLKe21Vg=; b=FNjg/KK3z43CBxdoBj4DiMOs6lEpaVT2c19t+sCcU5AnFVO//ILQqObKmdgVNHei83gaxh z9RxPcTXVixWGXfKVv6CO/prEPtQ38fEiG2sZEiHcpNexDuMUHydc8WO/9cVpIn9BMTUOL E1PFsRI3MNyAs2jMaXjU5fK1c0LW82/lHXZn3RtxqyT0cxzWpvgypVIYup8sRwglobt4ge xe33rDmF8gDrlitIgs7AFwCzwBXaZteHgvLktvsEUkToWNiEx15RjVwQyYIttgB+2sCLP4 nyV92pk6a+XfkG621JknI8y5xftNJVuiQ+QLKqyqDBbqxWDrP3kqu2ECjGrwxA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1761740027; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=esT651bRTLMfYO64YXGQAJOBt0V7qx7+gpXmLKe21Vg=; b=GHI1xpu7ATaNuoTDBNyIGte1DBj98hRzidFOeQS/Z6SjdbJBBv14xsj9/Duna/GlphZwf2 KelyW71TWP5MkEBw== To: Pingfan Liu Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Waiman Long , Peter Zijlstra , Juri Lelli , Pierre Gondois , Andrew Morton , Baoquan He , Ingo Molnar , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Steven Rostedt , Valentin Schneider , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Joel Granados Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] kernel/cpu: Mark nonboot cpus as inactive when shutting down nonboot cpus In-Reply-To: References: <20251022121345.23496-1-piliu@redhat.com> <20251022121345.23496-3-piliu@redhat.com> <877bwgw9yf.ffs@tglx> <87qzunuqqo.ffs@tglx> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 13:13:46 +0100 Message-ID: <874irhvrb9.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, Oct 29 2025 at 19:36, Pingfan Liu wrote: > On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 01:59:11PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> If you freeze stuff there is nothing to do. Hibernation works exactly >> that way without any magic hacks in a particular scheduling class, no? >> > > There is a nuance: DL bandwidth represents a commitment, not necessarily > the actual payload. Even a blocked DL task still occupies DL bandwidth. > The system's DL bandwidth remains unchanged as long as the CPUs stay > online, which is the case in hibernation. No. Hibernation brings the non-boot CPUs down in order to create the disk image. Thanks, tglx