Re: [PATCH 4/5] workqueue: update NUMA affinity for the node lost CPU

2014-12-25 Thread Tejun Heo
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 09:28:40AM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > > The foundation those pools were standing are gone. > > This statement is not true unless we write some code to force them, > dequeue them from the unbound_pool_hash, for example. Yeah, that's the obvious thing to do. Those pools

Re: [PATCH 4/5] workqueue: update NUMA affinity for the node lost CPU

2014-12-14 Thread Lai Jiangshan
On 12/13/2014 01:27 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 06:19:54PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: >> We fixed the major cases when the numa mapping is changed. >> >> We still have the assumption that when the node<->cpu mapping is changed >> the original node is offline, and the current cod

Re: [PATCH 4/5] workqueue: update NUMA affinity for the node lost CPU

2014-12-12 Thread Tejun Heo
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 06:19:54PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > We fixed the major cases when the numa mapping is changed. > > We still have the assumption that when the node<->cpu mapping is changed > the original node is offline, and the current code of memory-hutplug also > prove this. > > Th