[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131205153016.GA20705@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 16:30:16 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, zhang.yi20@....com.cn,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] usermodehelper: kill
____call_usermodehelper()->set_cpus_allowed_ptr()
Hi,
On 12/05, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 03:37:45PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > OK, but I'd like to remind just in case, as Tejun pointed out this
> > patch is wrong ;)
> >
> > And "change the affinity of workqueue themselves" is not simple, but
> > we can make khelper_wq WQ_SYSFS.
>
> Maybe workqueue should implement and expose default attributes which
> are inherited by all workqueues unless they're explicitly overridden?
> The use case here is not really about isolating certain subgroup of
> workers but rather being able to control the default behavior, right?
Perhaps, I simply do not know what the users want.
Either way, if khelper_wq will be controlled by sysfs, then this
set_cpus_allowed_ptr() should probably die.
Oleg.
--
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