[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090105011414.176a5ee3.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 01:14:14 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Mike Travis <travis@....com>, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] cpuset: convert cpuset_attach() to use
cpumask_var_t
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:04:54 +0800 Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:47:21 +0800 Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Allocate a global cpumask_var_t at boot, and use it in cpuset_attach(), so
> >> we won't fail cpuset_attach().
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
> >> Acked-by: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
> >> ---
> >> kernel/cpuset.c | 14 +++++++++-----
> >> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/kernel/cpuset.c b/kernel/cpuset.c
> >> index afa29cf..1e32e6b 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/cpuset.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/cpuset.c
> >> @@ -1306,6 +1306,9 @@ static int fmeter_getrate(struct fmeter *fmp)
> >> return val;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +/* Protected by cgroup_lock */
> >> +static cpumask_var_t cpus_attach;
> >> +
> >> /* Called by cgroups to determine if a cpuset is usable; cgroup_mutex held */
> >> static int cpuset_can_attach(struct cgroup_subsys *ss,
> >> struct cgroup *cont, struct task_struct *tsk)
> >> @@ -1330,7 +1333,6 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_subsys *ss,
> >> struct cgroup *cont, struct cgroup *oldcont,
> >> struct task_struct *tsk)
> >> {
> >> - cpumask_t cpus;
> >> nodemask_t from, to;
> >> struct mm_struct *mm;
> >> struct cpuset *cs = cgroup_cs(cont);
> >> @@ -1338,13 +1340,13 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_subsys *ss,
> >> int err;
> >>
> >> if (cs == &top_cpuset) {
> >> - cpus = cpu_possible_map;
> >> + cpumask_copy(cpus_attach, cpu_possible_mask);
> >> } else {
> >> mutex_lock(&callback_mutex);
> >> - guarantee_online_cpus(cs, &cpus);
> >> + guarantee_online_cpus(cs, cpus_attach);
> >> mutex_unlock(&callback_mutex);
> >> }
> >> - err = set_cpus_allowed_ptr(tsk, &cpus);
> >> + err = set_cpus_allowed_ptr(tsk, cpus_attach);
> >> if (err)
> >> return;
> >>
> >> @@ -1357,7 +1359,6 @@ static void cpuset_attach(struct cgroup_subsys *ss,
> >> cpuset_migrate_mm(mm, &from, &to);
> >> mmput(mm);
> >> }
> >> -
> >> }
> >>
> >> /* The various types of files and directories in a cpuset file system */
> >> @@ -1838,6 +1839,9 @@ int __init cpuset_init(void)
> >> if (err < 0)
> >> return err;
> >>
> >> + if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&cpus_attach, GFP_KERNEL))
> >> + BUG();
> >> +
> >> number_of_cpusets = 1;
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> >
> > OK, that works.
> >
> > Do we need to dynamically allocate cpus_attach? Can we just do
> >
> > static cpumask_t cpus_attach;
> >
> > ?
> >
>
> Yes, it's used by cpuset_attach() only, and cpuset_attach() is called with
> cgroup_lock() held, so it won't happen that 2 threads access cpus_attach
> concurrently.
You misunderstand my question. I think.
Can we allocate cpus_attach at compile time? Completely, not
partially. By doing
static cpumask_t cpus_attach;
instead of
static cpumask_var_t cpus_attach;
...
alloc_cpumask_var(&cpus_attach, GFP_KERNEL);
?
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists