From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@windriver.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jim Somerville <Jim.Somerville@windriver.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] isolcpus: affine kernel threads to specified cpumask
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 15:36:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200331133637.GB24647@lenoir> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200331115014.GA2182@fuller.cnet>
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 08:50:14AM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 02:57:08AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 12:21:19PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> Hi Frederic,
>
> > So, what about what I suggested with having "unbound" instead, which
> > includes all the CPU-unbound work?
> >
> > HK_FLAG_WQ | HK_FLAG_TIMER | HK_FLAG_RCU | HK_FLAG_MISC | HK_FLAG_KTHREAD | HK_FLAG_SCHED
>
> After more thought, it would share certain flags with nohz_full=, which
> seemed confusing.
In fact I think we should also add HK_FLAG_KTHREAD | HK_FLAG_SCHED to nohz_full=
nohz_full is merely just a shortcut to isolate the tick and the unbound works anyway.
>
> > (and yes your suggestion of including HK_FLAG_SCHED is good).
> >
> > Because I don't see the point of exposing kthread isolation alone as an ABI
> > so far.
> >
> > Later I suspect I'll turn all these flags into a single HK_FLAG_UNBOUND.
>
> How about keeping the flags separate, and then on top of that do
> an "unbound" flag (less typing needed).
>
> This would allow users to combine the individual flags (again, useful
> for debugging) while at the same time having an option which groups
> all the others?
Well, I'd rather not expose all the individual bits to the user. They rely
on kernel implementation details that shouldn't be much useful to the user.
As for internal kernel use, not sure this will ease debugging...
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-31 13:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-28 15:21 [patch 0/3] affine kernel threads to specified cpumask (v3) Marcelo Tosatti
2020-03-28 15:21 ` [patch 1/3] kthread: switch to cpu_possible_mask Marcelo Tosatti
2020-03-28 15:21 ` [patch 2/3] isolcpus: affine kernel threads to specified cpumask Marcelo Tosatti
2020-03-31 0:57 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-03-31 11:50 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-03-31 13:36 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2020-03-28 15:21 ` [patch 3/3] isolcpus: undeprecate on documentation Marcelo Tosatti
2020-03-31 15:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-03-31 15:41 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2020-03-31 15:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-04-04 23:05 ` Christopher Lameter
2020-03-31 15:43 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20200331133637.GB24647@lenoir \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=Jim.Somerville@windriver.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.friesen@windriver.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.