linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] S390 topology: don't use kthread() for arch_reinit_sched

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <48694659.2040709@qualcomm.com>
Date:	Mon, 30 Jun 2008 13:47:21 -0700
From:	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>
To:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
CC:	heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, oleg@...sign.ru,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ego@...ibm.com, menage@...gle.com,
	peterz@...radead.org, vegard.nossum@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] S390 topology: don't use kthread() for arch_reinit_sched_domains()

Paul Jackson wrote:
> Max wrote:
>> When a CPU goes off line overall partitioning does not change we just 
>> need to update current domains and remove the CPU that is no longer 
>> available.
> 
> I don't believe that this is correct.
> 
> If one had say just the following three cpusets in a system:
> 
> 	/dev/cpuset		# sched_load_balance == 0
> 	/dev/cpuset/alpha	# sched_load_balance == 1
> 	/dev/cpuset/beta	# sched_load_balance == 1
> 
> where the 'cpus' of alpha and beta overlapped by a single CPU,
> and if one then took that single CPU offline, then the overall
> partitioning of the system would change, from a single sched
> domain covering the combined 'cpus' of alpha and beta, to two
> separate sched domains, handling the 'cpus' of alpha and beta
> separately.
> 
>> When a CPU goes online it always ends up in the root cpuset, 
>> which means it can be added to the first load-balanced sched domain.
> 
> Also not correct, but at least in this case, one might be able
> to avoid doing a full fledged 'rebuild_sched_domains()' call,
> by the following reasoning.
> 
>     When bringing CPUs online, either the top cpuset has
>     sched_load_balance set (1) or off (0).  If it is set, then one
>     has a single sched domain covering all online CPUs, and yes one
>     could just add the new CPU to that sched domain.  If off, then
>     the newly online CPU would only be in the top cpuset, which does
>     not by itself put that CPU in any sched domain, and that new CPU
>     should not be added to -any- cpuset.
> 
> However, since we have to handle the offline case as well as the online
> case, and since that case requires (to the best of my understanding)
> calling rebuild_sched_domains(), I think it is best to just call that
> routine in all cases.
> 
> An earlier version of this sched domain code always attempted to
> incrementally adjust sched domains to online and offline events,
> and that code ended up being a maintenance nightmare.  I will be most
> reluctant to attempt to go back to such calculations.

Makes perfect sense. Thanx for the explanation. You've just saved me a 
bunch of time :). I'll give up on that idea then and instead will go and 
play with Paul M.'s latest patch.

btw We should update s390 to not call arch_init_sched_domains() directly 
once we know that rebuild_sched_domains() is safe to call from most 
contexts.

Max





--
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/