[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20131017122344.39d55db97c3923131bdf2831@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 12:23:44 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for
kthreadd
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 22:37:52 +0000 Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:
> > > - /* We can run anywhere, unlike our parent keventd(). */
> > > - set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, cpu_all_mask);
> > > + /* We can run anywhere kthreadd can run */
> >
> > This is a poor comment - it explains "what" (which was utterly obvious)
> > but doesn't explain "why". The reader will want to know *why*
> > call_usermodehelper() only runs on kthreadd CPUs, but we didn't tell
> > him.
>
> We'd like to have the ability to avoid running usermodehelper on certain
> cpus to avoid cpu holdoff situations? Would that we an acceptable
> explanation?
>
> Or restricting kthreadd will also restrict usermodehelper spawning to
> allow control for all spawned kernel threads?
Both, please ;)
--
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