[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZoFgLxGXrk4VCR03@fedora>
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2024 21:39:59 +0800
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbecker@...e.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
Sridhar Balaraman <sbalaraman@...allelwireless.com>,
"brookxu.cn" <brookxu.cn@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] lib/group_cpus.c: honor housekeeping config when
grouping CPUs
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 04:10:53PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> group_cpus_evenly distributes all present CPUs into groups. This ignores
The above isn't true, it is really cpu_possible_mask which is
distributed, instead of all present CPUs.
> the isolcpus configuration and assigns isolated CPUs into the groups.
>
> Make group_cpus_evenly aware of isolcpus configuration and use the
> housekeeping CPU mask as base for distributing the available CPUs into
> groups.
>
> Fixes: 11ea68f553e2 ("genirq, sched/isolation: Isolate from handling managed interrupts")
isolated CPUs are actually handled when figuring out irq effective mask,
so not sure how commit 11ea68f553e2 is wrong, and what is fixed in this
patch from user viewpoint?
Thanks,
Ming
Powered by blists - more mailing lists