[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200903251103.10249.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:03:08 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Correct behaviour of irq affinity?
On Tuesday 24 March 2009 23:09:37 Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> desc->affinity should be what the user requested, if it is at all
> possible to honor the user space request. YH the fact that we do not
> currently exercise the full freedom that user space gives us is
> irrelevant.
Yep, OK.
> YH has a point that several of the implementations of
> cpu_mask_to_apic_id do not take cpu_online_map into account and should
> probably be fixed. flat_cpu_mask_to_apicid was the one I could find.
Also the numaq apic.h. I'll do an audit and send a patch.
> Also now that I look at it there is one other bug in this routine
> that you have missed. set_extra_move_desc should be called before
> we set desc->affinity, as it compares that with the new value to
> see if we are going to be running on a new cpu, and if so we may
> need to reallocate irq_desc onto a new numa node. set_extra_move_desc
> looks a little fishy but it doesn't stand a chance if it is called
> with the wrong data.
Yes, agree with Yinghai's fix. I'll re-spin my patch on top of his.
Thanks for looking at this!
Rusty.
--
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