lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 4/6] cpuset: Make generate_sched_domains() recognize isolated_cpus
On 28/05/18 21:24, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 05/28/2018 09:12 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> > On 05/24/2018 06:28 AM, Juri Lelli wrote:
> >> On 17/05/18 16:55, Waiman Long wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>> @@ -849,7 +860,12 @@ static void rebuild_sched_domains_locked(void)
> >>> * passing doms with offlined cpu to partition_sched_domains().
> >>> * Anyways, hotplug work item will rebuild sched domains.
> >>> */
> >>> - if (!cpumask_equal(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, cpu_active_mask))
> >>> + if (!top_cpuset.isolation_count &&
> >>> + !cpumask_equal(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, cpu_active_mask))
> >>> + goto out;
> >>> +
> >>> + if (top_cpuset.isolation_count &&
> >>> + !cpumask_subset(top_cpuset.effective_cpus, cpu_active_mask))
> >>> goto out;
> >> Do we cover the case in which hotplug removed one of the isolated cpus
> >> from cpu_active_mask?
> > Yes, you are right. That is the remnant of my original patch that allows
> > only one isolated_cpus at root. Thanks for spotting that.
>
> I am sorry. I would like to take it back my previous comment. The code
> above looks for inconsistency in the state of the effective_cpus mask to
> find out if it is racing with a hotplug event. If it is, we can skip the
> domain generation as the hotplug event will do that too. The checks are
> still valid with the current patchset. So I don't think we need to make
> any change here.

Yes, these checks are valid, but don't we also need to check for hotplug
races w.r.t. isolated CPUs (of some other sub domain)?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-29 08:29    [W:0.081 / U:0.964 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site