Messages in this thread | | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Correct behaviour of irq affinity? | Date | Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:03:08 +1030 |
| |
On Tuesday 24 March 2009 23:09:37 Eric W. Biederman wrote: > desc->affinity should be what the user requested, if it is at all > possible to honor the user space request. YH the fact that we do not > currently exercise the full freedom that user space gives us is > irrelevant.
Yep, OK.
> YH has a point that several of the implementations of > cpu_mask_to_apic_id do not take cpu_online_map into account and should > probably be fixed. flat_cpu_mask_to_apicid was the one I could find.
Also the numaq apic.h. I'll do an audit and send a patch.
> Also now that I look at it there is one other bug in this routine > that you have missed. set_extra_move_desc should be called before > we set desc->affinity, as it compares that with the new value to > see if we are going to be running on a new cpu, and if so we may > need to reallocate irq_desc onto a new numa node. set_extra_move_desc > looks a little fishy but it doesn't stand a chance if it is called > with the wrong data.
Yes, agree with Yinghai's fix. I'll re-spin my patch on top of his.
Thanks for looking at this! Rusty.
| |