lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Apr]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Hotplug CPU and setaffinity?

>>The affinity of the process is reset to the default and it is migrated
>>to another cpu, for better or worse. The kernel assumes the admin
>>know what he/she is doing.
>
>
> Yeh that's ok - is there anything that would hotplug a cpu
> automatically; say on receiving some MCEs ; and thus not
> give the admin a look in.

On ppc64 we have CPU guard, which would remove a processor if it is
failing. Of course, the implications of not removing such a CPU are
pretty terrible.

>
>
>>>In particular I was thinking of the cases where a thread has a
>>> functional reason for remaining on one particular CPU (e.g. if you
>>>had calibrated for some feature of that CPU say its time stamp
>>>counter skew/speed). Another case would be a set of threads which
>>>had set their affinity to the same CPU and then made memory
>>>consistency or locking assumptions that wouldn't be valid
>>>if they got rescheduled onto different CPUs.

This sounds like a theoretical problem. Can you think of any real
examples? The only cases I can think of cause performance hits, but not
functional problems.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-04-25 18:15    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site