linux-kernel - Re: cpusets not cpu hotplug aware

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20060823145817.GA28175@krispykreme>
Date:	Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:58:18 +1000
From:	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, simon.derr@...l.net,
	nathanl@...tin.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: cpusets not cpu hotplug aware

Hi,

> Well...  let's suck it and see (please).  If for some reason it proves
> inadequate and the default kernel behaviour is significantly wrong (it
> seems to be) then there's an argument for modifying (ie: adding complexity
> to) the kernel.

I think there is. We have a userspace visible change to the sched
affinity API when the cpusets option is enabled. Papering over it with a
udev callback doesnt sound like the right solution.

Im struggling to understand why we have this problem at all. If a task
has not been touched by cpuset calls it should be allowed to use any
cpu. I completely agree that once you have partitioned the task with
cpusets then it should never spill onto more recently hotplug added
cpus.

Anton
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/