lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jan]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [EXT] Re: [Patch v4 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs
On 1/29/21 06:23, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> External Email
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 08:55:20AM -0500, Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote:
>>
>> On 1/28/21 3:01 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 28 2021 at 13:59, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>>>>> The whole pile wants to be reverted. It's simply broken in several ways.
>>>> I was asking for your comments on interaction with CPU hotplug :-)
>>> Which I answered in an seperate mail :)
>>>
>>>> So housekeeping_cpumask has multiple meanings. In this case:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> So as long as the meaning of the flags are respected, seems
>>>> alright.
>>> Yes. Stuff like the managed interrupts preference for housekeeping CPUs
>>> when a affinity mask spawns housekeeping and isolated is perfectly
>>> fine. It's well thought out and has no limitations.
>>>
>>>> Nitesh, is there anything preventing this from being fixed
>>>> in userspace ? (as Thomas suggested previously).
>>> Everything with is not managed can be steered by user space.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> tglx
>>>
>>
>> So, I think the conclusion here would be to revert the change made in
>> cpumask_local_spread via the patch:
>>  - lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to housekeeping CPUs
>>
>> Also, a similar case can be made for the rps patch that went in with
>> this:
>> - net: Restrict receive packets queuing to housekeeping CPUs
>
> Yes, this is the userspace solution:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/1/22/815
>
> Should have a kernel document with this info and examples
> (the network queue configuration as well). Will
> send something.
>
>> + net: accept an empty mask in /sys/class/net/*/queues/rx-*/rps_cpus
>>
>> I am not sure about the PCI patch as I don't think we can control that from
>> the userspace or maybe I am wrong?
>
> You mean "lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to housekeeping CPUs" ?
>

If we want to do it from userspace, we should have something that
triggers it in userspace. Should we use udev for this purpose?

--
Alex

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-01-29 18:42    [W:0.092 / U:1.332 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site