* Gautham R Shenoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> a) cpufreq maintain's it's own cpumask in the variable
> policy->affected_cpus and says : If a frequency change is issued to
> any one of the cpu's in the affected_cpus mask, you change frequency
> on all cpus in the mask. So this needs to be consistent with
> cpu_online map and hence cpu hotplug aware. Furthermore, we don't want
> cpus in this mask to go down when we are trying to change frequencies
> on them. The function which drives the frequency change in
> cpufreq-core is cpufreq_driver_target and it needs cpu-hotplug
> protection.
couldnt this complexity be radically simplified by having new kernel
infrastructure that does something like:
" 'gather' all CPUs mentioned in <mask> via scheduling a separate
helper-kthread on every CPU that <mask> specifies, disable all
interrupts, and execute function <fn> once all CPUs have been
'gathered' - and release all CPUs once <fn> has executed on each of
them."
?
This would be done totally serialized and while holding the hotplug
lock, so no CPU could go away or arrive while this operation is going
on.
Ingo
-
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]
