Re: [Patch v4 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs

2021-04-15 Thread Nitesh Narayan Lal
On 4/14/21 12:11 PM, Jesse Brandeburg wrote: > Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote: > >>> The original issue as seen, was that if you rmmod/insmod a driver >>> *without* irqbalance running, the default irq mask is -1, which means >>> any CPU. The older kernels (this issue was patched in 2014) used to use >>

Re: [Patch v4 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs

2021-04-14 Thread Jesse Brandeburg
Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote: > > The original issue as seen, was that if you rmmod/insmod a driver > > *without* irqbalance running, the default irq mask is -1, which means > > any CPU. The older kernels (this issue was patched in 2014) used to use > > that affinity mask, but the value programmed int

Re: [Patch v4 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs

2021-04-08 Thread Nitesh Narayan Lal
On 4/7/21 11:18 AM, Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote: > On 4/6/21 1:22 PM, Jesse Brandeburg wrote: >> Continuing a thread from a bit ago... >> >> Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote: >> After a little more digging, I found out why cpumask_local_spread change affects the general/initial smp_affinity for ce