Re: CPU Hotplug rework

From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Fri Mar 23 2012 - 20:24:01 EST


On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 09:57:32AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:49:20 -0700, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 02:55:04PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > > On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 10:01:59 +0100, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > Thing is, if its really too much for some people, they can orchestrate
> > > > it such that its not. Just move everybody in a cpuset, clear the to be
> > > > offlined cpu from the cpuset's mask -- this will migrate everybody away.
> > > > Then hotplug will find an empty runqueue and its fast, no?
> > >
> > > I like this solution better.
> >
> > As long as we have some way to handle kthreads that are algorithmically
> > tied to a given CPU. There are coding conventions to handle this, for
> > example, do everything with preemption disabled and just after each
> > preempt_disable() verify that you are in fact running on the correct
> > CPU, but it is easy to imagine improvements.
>
> I don't think we should move per-cpu kthreads at all. Let's stop trying
> to save a few bytes of memory, and just leave them frozen. They'll run
> again if/when the CPU returns.

OK, that would work for me. So, how do I go about freezing RCU's
per-CPU kthreads?

Thanx, Paul

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