Earlier today I wrote:
> I've half a mind to prepare a patch to just rip out the sched domain
> defining code from kernel/cpuset.c, completely uncoupling the
> cpu_exclusive flag, and any other cpuset flags, from sched domains.
>
> Example:
>
> As best as I can tell (which is not very far ;), if some hapless
> user does the following:
>
> /dev/cpuset cpu_exclusive == 1; cpus == 0-7
> /dev/cpuset/a cpu_exclusive == 1; cpus == 0-3
> /dev/cpsuet/b cpu_exclusive == 1; cpus == 4-7
>
> and then runs a big job in the top cpuset (/dev/cpuset), then that
> big job will not load balance correctly, with whatever threads
> in the big job that got stuck on cpus 0-3 isolated from whatever
> threads got stuck on cpus 4-7.
>
> Is this correct?
>
> If so, there no practical way that I can see on a production system for
> the system admin to realize they have messed up their system this way.
>
> If we can't make this work properly automatically, then we either need
> to provide users the visibility and control to make it work by explicit
> manual control (meaning my 'sched_domain' flag patch, plus some way of
> exporting the sched domain topology in /sys), or we need to stop doing
> this.
I am now more certain - the above gives an example of serious breakage
with the current mechanism of connecting cpusets to sched domains via
the cpuset flag.
We should either fix it (perhaps with my patch to add sched_domain
flags to cpusets, plus a yet to be written patch to make sched domains
visible via /sys or some such place), or we should nuke it,
I am now 90% certain we should nuke the entire mechanism connecting
cpusets to sched domains via the cpu_exclusive flag.
The only useful thing to be done, which is much simpler, is to provide
someway to manipulate the cpu_isolated_map at runtime.
I have a pair of patches ready to ship out that do this.
Coming soon to a mailing list near you ...
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
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]
