[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YpAHEt0j30vBw9au@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 13:02:42 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...nel.org>,
Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenz@...nel.org>,
rcu@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] cpuset: Support RCU-NOCB toggle on v2 root
partitions
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 12:51:41AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Does it even make sense to make this hierarchical? What's wrong with a
> > cpumask under sys/ or proc/?
>
> I'm usually told that cpusets is the current place where CPU attributes are
> supposed to go. I personally don't mind much /sys either even though cpusets
> looks like a more flexible way to partition CPUs with properties and tasks
> placement altogether...
Yeah, I mean, if it's hierarchical, it's the right place but I have a hard
time seeing anything hierarchical with this one. Somebody just has to know
which cpus are up for rcu processing and which aren't. Waiman, what do you
think?
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists