Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3 V8] workqueue: Allow modifying low level unbound workqueue cpumask | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Tue, 28 Apr 2015 06:36:44 +0200 |
| |
On Mon, 2015-04-27 at 23:44 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > So, we need an API to modify the wq_unbound_cpumask, and I provided > > this public function. Otherwise, the other code can't modify it. > > I see. I don't have too strong an opinion; however, changing the mask > is a fairly heavy operation. Are there specific reasons why we don't > want to follow the nohz config right away?
Isolation is not only applicable to nohz_full. Many loads are unsuitable for nohz_full, yet require maximum isolation.
ATM, nohz_full is not dynamic, but hopefully one day will be. In the here and now, we can isolate cores from the scheduler on the fly via cpusets, a prime API user candidate.
-Mike
| |