[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141014173837.GA8919@node.dhcp.inet.fi>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 20:38:37 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Alex Thorlton <athorlton@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Bob Liu <lliubbo@...il.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] mm, thp: khugepaged can't allocate on requested node when
confined to a cpuset
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 04:54:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Is there a reason why we should respect cpuset limitation for kernel
> > threads?
>
> Yes, because we want to allow isolating CPUs from 'random' activity.
Okay, it makes sense for cpus_allowed. But we're talking about
mems_allowed, right?
>
> > Should we bypass cpuset for PF_KTHREAD completely?
>
> No. That'll break stuff.
Like what?
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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