netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] kthread: NUMA aware kthread_create_on

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

Message-Id: <20101209230937.073fab54.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 9 Dec 2010 23:09:37 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] kthread: NUMA aware kthread_create_on_cpu()

On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 08:02:41 +0100 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:

> Le jeudi 09 d__cembre 2010 __ 22:32 -0800, Andrew Morton a __crit :
> 
> > but but but.  The name "kthread_create_on_cpu" sucks.  It's plain wrong.
> 
> Okay you are right Andrew ;) I dont have better idea for the moment.

Dunno.  kthread_create_with_memory_on_node() :)

How's about kthread_create_for_node()?  That's sufficiently vague to
not mislead readers into thinking that it schedules the thread on that
CPU and leaves room in the namespace for a real kthread_create_on_cpu()
(which we could well end up creating).

kthread_create_node_mem()?

> Note that all callers I converted really create one kthread per cpu, not
> per node. They didnt care of node affinity, only me :)
> 
> kthread_create_on_node() seems misleading to me (some cpus run on
> memoryless nodes)

True, but what we're doing here is specifying on which node the
kthread's memory resources should reside - we need to do that even for
CPUs which live on memoryless nodes.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html