[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160615155350.GB24102@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 11:53:50 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Abdul Haleem <abdhalee@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] workqueue: Move wq_update_unbound_numa() to the
beginning of CPU_ONLINE
Hello,
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:44:02PM +0530, Gautham R. Shenoy wrote:
> Currently in the CPU_ONLINE workqueue handler, the
> restore_unbound_workers_cpumask() will never call
> set_cpus_allowed_ptr() for a newly created unbound worker thread.
Hmmm... did you actually verify that this happens? A new kworker
always gets bound to the cpumask that it's assigned to in
create_worker().
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists