[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9ccb1100-295e-a99b-949b-a400f177c947@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:48:51 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] sched: Enforce user requested affinity
On 8/31/22 05:18, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 09:01:17PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>
>> @@ -9352,6 +9381,11 @@ int sched_cpu_activate(unsigned int cpu)
>> sched_update_numa(cpu, true);
>> sched_domains_numa_masks_set(cpu);
>> cpuset_cpu_active();
>> + /*
>> + * Preallocated scratch cpumask
>> + */
>> + if (!rq->scratch_mask)
>> + rq->scratch_mask = kmalloc(cpumask_size(), GFP_KERNEL);
>> }
> this is too late; I think you'll have to add a sched_cpu_prepare() and
> simply fail the cpu-up when the allocation fails.
>
That is the reason why I have a fallback allocation in
__set_cpus_allowed_ptr(). Thanks for the suggestion, I will looking into
doing that.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists