From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
frederic@kernel.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, abelits@marvell.com,
bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
rostedt@goodmis.org, mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
davem@davemloft.net, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
sfr@canb.auug.org.au, stephen@networkplumber.org,
rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jinyuqi@huawei.com,
zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com
Subject: Re: [Patch v4 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2021 15:15:46 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210204181546.GA30113@fuller.cnet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87h7n0de5a.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 09:01:37PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28 2021 at 13:59, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >> The whole pile wants to be reverted. It's simply broken in several ways.
> >
> > I was asking for your comments on interaction with CPU hotplug :-)
>
> Which I answered in an seperate mail :)
>
> > So housekeeping_cpumask has multiple meanings. In this case:
>
> ...
>
> > So as long as the meaning of the flags are respected, seems
> > alright.
>
> Yes. Stuff like the managed interrupts preference for housekeeping CPUs
> when a affinity mask spawns housekeeping and isolated is perfectly
> fine. It's well thought out and has no limitations.
>
> > Nitesh, is there anything preventing this from being fixed
> > in userspace ? (as Thomas suggested previously).
>
> Everything with is not managed can be steered by user space.
Yes, but it seems to be racy (that is, there is a window where the
interrupt can be delivered to an isolated CPU).
ethtool ->
xgbe_set_channels ->
xgbe_full_restart_dev ->
xgbe_alloc_memory ->
xgbe_alloc_channels ->
cpumask_local_spread
Also ifconfig eth0 down / ifconfig eth0 up leads
to cpumask_spread_local.
How about adding a new flag for isolcpus instead?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-04 18:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-25 22:34 [PATCH v4 0/3] Preventing job distribution to isolated CPUs Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-25 22:34 ` [Patch v4 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-29 16:11 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-07-01 0:32 ` Andrew Morton
2020-07-01 0:47 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-01-27 11:57 ` Robin Murphy
2021-01-27 12:19 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2021-01-27 12:36 ` Robin Murphy
2021-01-27 13:09 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2021-01-27 13:49 ` Robin Murphy
2021-01-27 14:16 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-01-28 15:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-01-28 16:33 ` Marcelo Tosatti
[not found] ` <02ac9d85-7ddd-96da-1252-4663feea7c9f@marvell.com>
2021-02-01 17:50 ` [EXT] " Marcelo Tosatti
2021-01-28 16:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-01-28 16:59 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2021-01-28 17:35 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-01-28 20:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
[not found] ` <d2a4dc97-a9ed-e0e7-3b9c-c56ae46f6608@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20210129142356.GB40876@fuller.cnet>
2021-01-29 17:34 ` [EXT] " Alex Belits
[not found] ` <18584612-868c-0f88-5de2-dc93c8638816@redhat.com>
2021-02-05 19:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-02-04 18:15 ` Marcelo Tosatti [this message]
2021-02-04 18:47 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-02-04 19:06 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2021-02-04 19:17 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-02-05 22:23 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-02-05 22:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-02-07 0:43 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-02-11 15:55 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-03-04 18:15 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
[not found] ` <faa8d84e-db67-7fbe-891e-f4987f106b20@marvell.com>
2021-03-04 23:23 ` [EXT] " Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-04-06 17:22 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2021-04-07 15:18 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-04-08 18:49 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-04-14 16:11 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2021-04-15 22:11 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2021-04-29 21:44 ` Nitesh Lal
2021-04-30 1:48 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2021-04-30 13:10 ` Nitesh Lal
2021-04-30 7:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-04-30 16:14 ` Nitesh Lal
2021-04-30 18:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-04-30 21:07 ` Nitesh Lal
2021-05-01 2:21 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2021-05-03 13:15 ` Nitesh Lal
2020-06-25 22:34 ` [Patch v4 2/3] PCI: Restrict probe functions to housekeeping CPUs Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-25 22:34 ` [Patch v4 3/3] net: Restrict receive packets queuing " Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-26 11:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-06-26 17:20 ` David Miller
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=20210204181546.GA30113@fuller.cnet \
--to=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=abelits@marvell.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=jinyuqi@huawei.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=nitesh@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zhangshaokun@hisilicon.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).