On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
>
> > Sounds much better than just killing the process.
>
> Right and having active interrupts or devices using that processor should
> also stop offlining a processor.
>
> So just remove everything from a processor before offlining. If you cannot
> remove all users then the processor cannot be offlined.
>
Hm..
Then, there is several ways to manage this sitation.
1. migrate all even if it's not allowed by users
2. kill mis-configured tasks.
3. stop ...
4. cancel cpu-hot-removal.
I just don't like "1".
I discussed this problem with my colleagues before sending patch,
one said "4" seems regular way but another said "4" is bad.
I sent a patch for "4" in the first place but Andi Kleen said it's bad.
As he said, I'm handling the problem for which I can't find a good answer :(
my point is that "1" is bad.
-Kame
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
