linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] genirq: Fix IRQ threads affinity VS cpuset isolated partitions

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87h5uojzcj.ffs@tglx>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2025 20:09:00 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, LKML
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Marco Crivellari
 <marco.crivellari@...e.com>, Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>,
 cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] genirq: Fix IRQ threads affinity VS cpuset isolated
 partitions

On Thu, Nov 20 2025 at 16:50, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Le Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 04:00:39PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner a écrit :
>> +	if (!secondary)
>> +		t = kthread_create_on_cpu(irq_thread, new, cpu, "irq/%d-%s", irq, new->name);
>> +	else
>> +		t = kthread_create_on_cpu(irq_thread, new, cpu, "irq/%d-s-%s",
>> -		irq, new->name);
>
> Right I though about something like that, it involved:
>
> kthread_bind_mask(t, cpu_possible_mask);

That's way simpler and also solves the problem with the
kthread_create_on_cpu() name which Marek pointed out.

> Which do you prefer? Also do you prefer such a fixup or should I refactor my
> patches you merged?

Can you split out the wakeup change into a separate patch
(Suggested-by-me) with it's own change log and fold the
kthread_bind_mask() + set(AFFINITY) bit into this one.

I just go and zap the existing commits (they are on top of the branch).

Thanks,

        tglx