On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 03:43:56PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 09:37:09PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Hurm.. So I've applied it, just to get this issue sorted, but I'm not > > entirely sure I like it. > > > > I think I prefer ego's version because that makes it harder to get stuff > > to run on !active,online cpus. I think we really want to be careful what > > gets to run during that state. > > The original patch just did set_cpus_allowed one more time late enough > so that the target kthread (in most cases) doesn't have to go through > fallback rq selection afterwards. I don't know what the long term > solution is but CPU_ONLINE callbacks should be able to bind kthreads > to the new CPU one way or the other.
Fair enough; clearly I need to stare harder. In any case, patch is on its way to sched/urgent. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
