[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <67f4b01a-7b23-49c2-a8db-059316300d39@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2026 15:20:51 -0500
From: Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>
To: Chen Ridong <chenridong@...weicloud.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Michal Koutný
<mkoutny@...e.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Cc: cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/for-next v4 3/4] cgroup/cpuset: Call housekeeping_update()
without holding cpus_read_lock
On 2/9/26 2:23 AM, Chen Ridong wrote:
>
> On 2026/2/7 4:37, Waiman Long wrote:
>> +static cpumask_var_t isolated_hk_cpus; /* T */
> Can we get this from isolation.c instead?
>
> The name probably shouldn't include 'hk', since it refers to the inverse
> (housekeeping CPUs) of isolated CPUs, right?
The housekeeping_update() will create an inverse of the pass-in isolated
cpumasks. As for the name, I add hk to indicate this cpumask is for
passing to housekeeping_update() to update housekeeping cpumask. It is
not directly related to the cpumasks in sched/isolation.c. Please let me
know if you have a suggestion for the name.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists