Re: [QUERY]: Is using CPU hotplug right for isolating CPUs?

[Viresh Kumar]

On 23 January 2014 19:31, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ok, so it is fine to migrate the latter kind I guess?

Unless somebody has abused the API and used bound workqueues where he
should have used unbound ones.

> I haven't checked the details but then this quiesce option would involve
> a dependency on cpuset for any workload involving workqueues affinity. I'm
> not sure we really want this. Besides, workqueues have an existing sysfs interface
> that can be easily extended.
>
> Now indeed we may also want to enforce some policy to make sure that further
> created and queued workqueues are affine to a specific subset of CPUs. And then
> cpuset sounds like a good idea :)

Exactly. Cpuset would be more useful here. Probably we can keep both cpusets
and sysfs interface of workqueues..

I will try to add this option under cpuset which will initially move timers and
workqueues away from the cpuset in question.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/