Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1721617
| From | Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping |
| Date | 2017-08-28 15:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ujsh3-665-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <uht7z-2oU-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <uht7A-2oU-37@gated-at.bofh.it> <ujpjc-4lO-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 12:09:57PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 03:51:11AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > We want to centralize the isolation features on the housekeeping > > subsystem and scheduler isolation is a significant part of it. > > > > While at it, this is a proposition for a reimplementation of isolcpus= > > that doesn't involve scheduler domain isolation. Therefore this > > brings a behaviour change: all user tasks inherit init/1 affinity which > > avoid the isolcpus= range. But if a task later overrides its affinity > > which turns out to intersect an isolated CPU, load balancing may occur > > on it. > > > > OTOH such a reimplementation that doesn't shortcut scheduler internals > > makes a better candidate for an interface extension to cpuset. > > Not sure we can do this. It'll break users that rely on the no > scheduling thing, that's a well documented part of isolcpus. That was my worry :-s That NULL domain was probably a design mistake and I fear we now have to maintain it.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-08-28 12:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2017-08-28 15:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-08-28 15:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2017-08-28 17:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-08-28 18:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2017-08-28 19:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2017-08-28 19:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-08-31 21:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 01:10 +0200
csiph-web