Eric, I am interested in your opinion of wli's patch, too. I really
liked his approach.
You seem to remove a lot of code since, after starting the first thread,
you rely on set_cpus_allowed and the existing migration_thread to push
the task to the correct place. I suppose this will work .. but it may
depend implicitly on behavior of the migration_threads and load_balance
(not that the current code doesn't rely on load_balance - it does).
What happens if a migration_thread comes up on a CPU without a migration
thread and then you call set_cpus_allowed?
I am also curious what causes #1 you mention. Do you see it in the
_normal_ code or just with your patch? I cannot see what we race
against wrt interrupts ... disabling interrupts, however, would disable
load_balance and that is a potential pitfall with using
migration_threads to migrate migration_threads as noted above.
Robert Love
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/