LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> To: Max Krasnyanskiy <maxk@qualcomm.com> Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com> Subject: Re: [CPUISOL] CPU isolation extensions Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:00:55 -0500 (EST) [thread overview] Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0801281358070.10419@gandalf.stny.rr.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <479E2305.3040408@qualcomm.com> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Max Krasnyanskiy wrote: > >> [PATCH] [CPUISOL] Support for workqueue isolation > > > > The thing about workqueues is that they should only be woken on a CPU if > > something on that CPU accessed them. IOW, the workqueue on a CPU handles > > work that was called by something on that CPU. Which means that > > something that high prio task did triggered a workqueue to do some work. > > But this can also be triggered by interrupts, so by keeping interrupts > > off the CPU no workqueue should be activated. > No no no. That's what I though too ;-). The problem is that things like NFS and friends > expect _all_ their workqueue threads to report back when they do certain things like > flushing buffers and stuff. The reason I added this is because my machines were getting > stuck because CPU0 was waiting for CPU1 to run NFS work queue threads even though no IRQs > or other things are running on it. This sounds more like we should fix NFS than add this for all workqueues. Again, we want workqueues to run on the behalf of whatever is running on that CPU, including those tasks that are running on an isolcpu. > > >> [PATCH] [CPUISOL] Isolated CPUs should be ignored by the "stop machine" > > > > This I find very dangerous. We are making an assumption that tasks on an > > isolated CPU wont be doing things that stopmachine requires. What stops > > a task on an isolated CPU from calling something into the kernel that > > stop_machine requires to halt? > I agree in general. The thing is though that stop machine just kills any kind of latency > guaranties. Without the patch the machine just hangs waiting for the stop-machine to run > when module is inserted/removed. And running without dynamic module loading is not very > practical on general purpose machines. So I'd rather have an option with a big red warning > than no option at all :). Well, that's something one of the greater powers (Linus, Andrew, Ingo) must decide. ;-) -- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-28 19:01 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2008-01-28 4:09 [CPUISOL] CPU isolation extensions maxk 2008-01-28 4:09 ` [PATCH] [CPUISOL] Add config options for CPU isolation maxk 2008-01-28 4:09 ` [PATCH] [CPUISOL] Export CPU isolation bits maxk 2008-01-28 4:09 ` [PATCH] [CPUISOL] Do not route IRQs to the CPUs isolated at boot maxk 2008-01-28 4:09 ` [PATCH] [CPUISOL] Support for workqueue isolation maxk 2008-01-28 4:09 ` [PATCH] [CPUISOL] Isolated CPUs should be ignored by the "stop machine" maxk 2008-01-28 9:08 ` [CPUISOL] CPU isolation extensions Peter Zijlstra 2008-01-28 14:59 ` Paul Jackson 2008-01-28 16:34 ` Steven Rostedt 2008-01-28 16:44 ` Peter Zijlstra 2008-01-28 18:54 ` Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-01-28 18:46 ` Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-01-28 19:00 ` Steven Rostedt [this message] 2008-01-28 20:22 ` Peter Zijlstra 2008-01-28 21:42 ` Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-02-05 0:32 ` CPU isolation and workqueues [was Re: [CPUISOL] CPU isolation extensions] Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-01-28 18:37 ` [CPUISOL] CPU isolation extensions Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-01-28 19:06 ` Paul Jackson 2008-01-28 21:47 ` Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-01-31 19:06 ` Integrating cpusets and cpu isolation [was Re: [CPUISOL] CPU isolation extensions] Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-02-02 6:16 ` Paul Jackson 2008-02-03 5:57 ` Max Krasnyansky 2008-02-03 7:53 ` Paul Jackson 2008-02-04 6:03 ` Max Krasnyansky 2008-02-04 10:54 ` Paul Jackson 2008-02-04 23:19 ` Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-02-05 2:46 ` Paul Jackson 2008-02-05 4:08 ` Max Krasnyansky 2008-01-28 18:32 ` [CPUISOL] CPU isolation extensions Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-01-28 19:10 ` Paul Jackson 2008-01-28 23:41 ` Daniel Walker 2008-01-29 0:12 ` Max Krasnyanskiy 2008-01-29 1:33 ` Daniel Walker 2008-02-04 6:53 ` Max Krasnyansky 2008-01-31 12:16 ` Mark Hounschell 2008-01-31 19:13 ` Max Krasnyanskiy
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.58.0801281358070.10419@gandalf.stny.rr.com \ --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \ --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \ --cc=ghaskins@novell.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=maxk@qualcomm.com \ --cc=mingo@elte.hu \ --cc=pj@sgi.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).