[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170209090808.GA6893@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 10:08:08 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] sched/core: Remove the tsk_cpus_allowed() wrapper
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 07:34:18PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > So the original intention of tsk_cpus_allowed() was to 'future-proof' the
> > field - but it's pretty ineffectual at that, because half of the code uses
> > ->cpus_allowed directly ...
> >
> > Also, the wrapper makes the code longer than the original expression!
>
> I still object to taking this out without replacement.
Yeah, that would have been my next suggestion.
> This leaves RT stranded.
Well, no, it leaves -rt with slightly more patching work than it already has...
Because note how the wrappery is _already_ incomplete to a significant degree:
triton:~/tip> git grep -Ee '->cpus_allowed' | grep -vE 'tsk_|cpuset|core.c' | wc -l
27
triton:~/tip> git grep tsk_cpus_allowed | wc -l
43
I.e. around 40% of the places that use ->cpus_allowed in the upstream kernel are
not properly wrapped. That fact already 'wrecks' -rt.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists