[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140515151256.GR30445@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 17:12:56 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>,
Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] funny sched_domain build failure during resume
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:41:14AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Is it necessary that resume paths allocate at all? Freeing at suspend
> what you have to reallocate at resume is asking for trouble. It's not
> just higher order allocations, either, even order-0 allocations are
> less reliable without GFP_IOFS. So I think this should be avoided as
> much as possible.
Well, in my case its because suspend does an effective hot-unplug of all
CPUs in the system except CPU0.
And if the cpu topology changes I need to allocate new data structures
and free the old ones.
The reverse is true on resume, it hot-plugs all CPUs again, same story.
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists