On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 11:01 AM Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:ttoukan.linux@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
On 7/27/2022 6:08 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2022 15:14:02 +0530 Geetha sowjanya wrote:
>> This patch excludes the isolates cpus from the cpus list
>> while setting up TX/RX queue interrupts affinity
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Geetha sowjanya <gakula@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:gakula@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:sgoutham@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
>
> Hm, housekeeping_cpumask() looks barely used by drivers,
> do you have any references to discussions indicated drivers
> are expected to pay attention to it? Really seems like something
> that the core should take care of.
>
> Tariq, thoughts?
I agree.
IMO this logic best fits inside the new sched API I proposed last week
(pending Ack...), transparent to driver.
Find here:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220719162339.23865-2-tariqt@xxxxxxxxxx/ <https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220719162339.23865-2-tariqt@xxxxxxxxxx/>
You mean
+static bool sched_cpus_spread_by_distance(int node, u16 *cpus, int ncpus) +{ +
.... + cpumask_copy(cpumask, cpu_online_mask);
Change cpu_online_mask here to a mask which gives non-isolated cores mask ?