[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ca667dd9-f228-c6a8-390b-7e3abde391c4@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 16:31:13 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Joel Savitz <jsavitz@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Yuan ZhaoXiong <yuanzhaoxiong@...du.com>,
Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
David Hildenbrand <dhildenb@...hat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kernel/cpu: restart cpu_up when hotplug is disabled
>> It's far from perfect I would say, but we really wanted to avoid
>> letting user space having to deal with retry logic.
>
> What's so hard with retry logic in user space?
>
> If you can come up with a reasonable argument why user space cannot be
> fixed, then there is certainly a better solution than slapping a
> msleep(5) at some random place into the code.
Most probably you're right and we should just retry in udev. Staring at
the history, it looks like the -EBUSY might have been returned forever,
so user space just never really triggered it on actual CPU hotplug
because it doesn't usually happen that cpu hotplug is disabled.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists