Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpusets,isolcpus: exclude isolcpus from load balancing in cpusets

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:38:07AM -0500, riel@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Ensure that cpus specified with the isolcpus= boot commandline
> option stay outside of the load balancing in the kernel scheduler.
> 
> Operations like load balancing can introduce unwanted latencies,
> which is exactly what the isolcpus= commandline is there to prevent.
> 
> Previously, simply creating a new cpuset, without even touching the
> cpuset.cpus field inside the new cpuset, would undo the effects of
> isolcpus=, by creating a scheduler domain spanning the whole system,
> and setting up load balancing inside that domain. The cpuset root
> cpuset.cpus file is read-only, so there was not even a way to undo
> that effect.
> 
> This does not impact the majority of cpusets users, since isolcpus=
> is a fairly specialized feature used for realtime purposes.
> 
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Clark Williams <williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Li Zefan <lizefan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: cgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>

Might I asked you to update Documentation/cgroups/cpusets.txt with this
knowledge? While it does mentions isolcpus it does not clarify the
interaction between it and cpusets.

Other than that,

Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
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/