linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/41] cpuset: Set up interface for nohz flag

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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1205081541010.1391@router.home>
Date:	Tue, 8 May 2012 15:45:38 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linaro-sched-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
	Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...era.com>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Geoff Levand <geoff@...radead.org>,
	Gilad Ben Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
	Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...com>,
	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <thebigcorporation@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/41] cpuset: Set up interface for nohz flag

On Tue, 8 May 2012, Mike Galbraith wrote:

> On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 18:16 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 10:57 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> > isolcpus is a very limited hack that adds more pain that its worth. Its
> > yet another mask to check and its functionality is completely available
> > through cpusets.
>
> Agreed.

How would that work? By creating cpusets that only have a single cpu in
them?

> > You cannot cree multi-cpu partitions using isolcpus, you cannot
> > dynamically reconfigure it.
>
> Big plus for cpusets.

Why would you want to do anything like it? cpusets are confusing. You can
have a cpu be part of multiple cpusets. Which nohz setting applies for a
particular cpu then? If any of the cpusets have nohz set then it applies
to the cpu? And thus someone in a cpuset that does not has nohz set will
find that a cpu will have nohz functionality?

Its not a good match for this. You would want a per cpu attribute for
nohz.

> > And on the scheduler side cpusets doesn't add runtime overhead to normal
> > things, only sched_setaffinity() and a few other rare operations get
> > slightly more expensive. And it allows to reduce runtime overhead by
> > making the load-balancer domains smaller.
>
> Very big deal if you have a load that doesn't do all the performance 'i'
> dotting and 't' crossing it maybe could have, but ends up on a big box.

isolcpus are not part of load balancer domains.
--
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/