[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20101209164438.fae1ba4c.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 16:44:38 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] kthread: NUMA aware kthread_create_on_cpu()
On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:14:55 +0100
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> All kthreads being created from a single helper task, they all use
> memory from a single node for their kernel stack and task struct.
>
> This patch suite creates kthread_create_on_cpu(), adding a 'cpu'
> parameter to parameters already used by kthread_create().
>
> This parameter serves in allocating memory for the new kthread on its
> memory node if possible.
The name "kthread_create_on_cpu" is pretty misleading.
One would expect such a function to create a kthread which is bound to
that CPU. But what it in fact does is to create a kthread which is
bound to all CPUs and whose stack, task_struct and thread_info were
allocated from the node which contains `cpu'.
Also, a saner interface would be one which takes the numa_node_id, not
the cpu number.
>
> ...
>
> /**
> - * kthread_create - create a kthread.
> + * kthread_create_on_cpu - create a kthread.
> * @threadfn: the function to run until signal_pending(current).
> * @data: data ptr for @threadfn.
> + * @cpu: cpu number.
> * @namefmt: printf-style name for the thread.
> *
> * Description: This helper function creates and names a kernel
> * thread. The thread will be stopped: use wake_up_process() to start
> * it. See also kthread_run().
> *
> + * If thread is going to be bound on a particular cpu, give its number
> + * in @cpu, to get NUMA affinity for kthread stack, or else give -1.
This is a bit presumptuous. The caller might wish to later bind this
thread to some or all of the CPUs on the node, rather than to a single
CPU (eg, kswapd()).
So what to do? Maybe add a new kthread_create_node() which prepares a
kthread whose memory is bound to that node, then add a
kthread_create_cpu() convenience wrapper around that?
>
> ...
>
--
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