From: Shaokun Zhang <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
<frederic@kernel.org>, <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
<juri.lelli@redhat.com>, <abelits@marvell.com>,
<bhelgaas@google.com>, <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
<rostedt@goodmis.org>, <mingo@kernel.org>, <peterz@infradead.org>,
<tglx@linutronix.de>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
<sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
<rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, yuqi jin <jinyuqi@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 17:01:41 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e6c261a1-1fec-3faf-c49c-51a88a7f521c@hisilicon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200624122647.766bec7760d9197ba71a58c4@linux-foundation.org>
Hi Andrew,
在 2020/6/25 3:26, Andrew Morton 写道:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:23:29 -0400 Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Alex Belits <abelits@marvell.com>
>>
>> The current implementation of cpumask_local_spread() does not respect the
>> isolated CPUs, i.e., even if a CPU has been isolated for Real-Time task,
>> it will return it to the caller for pinning of its IRQ threads. Having
>> these unwanted IRQ threads on an isolated CPU adds up to a latency
>> overhead.
>>
>> Restrict the CPUs that are returned for spreading IRQs only to the
>> available housekeeping CPUs.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> --- a/lib/cpumask.c
>> +++ b/lib/cpumask.c
>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>> #include <linux/export.h>
>> #include <linux/memblock.h>
>> #include <linux/numa.h>
>> +#include <linux/sched/isolation.h>
>>
>> /**
>> * cpumask_next - get the next cpu in a cpumask
>> @@ -205,22 +206,27 @@ void __init free_bootmem_cpumask_var(cpumask_var_t mask)
>> */
>> unsigned int cpumask_local_spread(unsigned int i, int node)
>> {
>> - int cpu;
>> + int cpu, hk_flags;
>> + const struct cpumask *mask;
>>
>> + hk_flags = HK_FLAG_DOMAIN | HK_FLAG_WQ;
>> + mask = housekeeping_cpumask(hk_flags);
>> /* Wrap: we always want a cpu. */
>> - i %= num_online_cpus();
>> + i %= cpumask_weight(mask);
>>
>> if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
>> - for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_online_mask)
>> + for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) {
>> if (i-- == 0)
>> return cpu;
>> + }
>> } else {
>> /* NUMA first. */
>> - for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpumask_of_node(node), cpu_online_mask)
>> + for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpumask_of_node(node), mask) {
>> if (i-- == 0)
>> return cpu;
>> + }
>>
>> - for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_online_mask) {
>> + for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) {
>> /* Skip NUMA nodes, done above. */
>> if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, cpumask_of_node(node)))
>> continue;
>
> Are you aware of these changes to cpu_local_spread()?
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1582768688-2314-1-git-send-email-zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com/
>
> I don't see a lot of overlap but it would be nice for you folks to
Yeah, it's a different issue from Nitesh. About our's patch, it has been
linux-next long time, will it be merged in Linus's tree?
Thanks,
Shaokun
> check each other's homework ;)
>
>
>
> .
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-30 0:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-23 19:23 [PATCH v3 0/3] Preventing job distribution to isolated CPUs Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-23 19:23 ` [Patch v3 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-24 12:13 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2020-06-24 20:37 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-24 19:26 ` Andrew Morton
2020-06-24 20:38 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-24 23:31 ` Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-29 9:01 ` Shaokun Zhang [this message]
2020-06-23 19:23 ` [Patch v3 2/3] PCI: Restrict probe functions to housekeeping CPUs Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-23 19:23 ` [Patch v3 3/3] net: Restrict receive packets queuing " Nitesh Narayan Lal
2020-06-24 10:08 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] Preventing job distribution to isolated CPUs Peter Zijlstra
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=e6c261a1-1fec-3faf-c49c-51a88a7f521c@hisilicon.com \
--to=zhangshaokun@hisilicon.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=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=nitesh@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.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 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).