[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201119092922.GC2416649@google.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 09:29:22 +0000
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/14] cpuset: Don't use the cpu_possible_mask as a
last resort for cgroup v1
On Friday 13 Nov 2020 at 09:37:14 (+0000), Will Deacon wrote:
> If the scheduler cannot find an allowed CPU for a task,
> cpuset_cpus_allowed_fallback() will widen the affinity to cpu_possible_mask
> if cgroup v1 is in use.
>
> In preparation for allowing architectures to provide their own fallback
> mask, just return early if we're not using cgroup v2 and allow
> select_fallback_rq() to figure out the mask by itself.
>
> Cc: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
That makes select_fallback_rq() slightly more expensive if you're using
cgroup v1, but I don't expect that be really measurable in real-world
workloads, so:
Reviewed-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
Thanks,
Quentin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists