From: Rusty Russell <rusty@au1.ibm.com>
To: vatsa@in.ibm.com
Cc: lhcs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, rml@tech9.net
Subject: CPU Hotplug: Hotplug Script And SIGPWR
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 16:44:45 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040120060027.91CC717DE5@ozlabs.au.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 16 Jan 2004 17:44:46 +0530." <20040116174446.A2820@in.ibm.com>
In message <20040116174446.A2820@in.ibm.com> you write:
> Would it make sense if we defer invoking hotplug script _after_
> the CPU is completely dead (i.e after issuing the CPU_DEAD
> notification)?
The original code wanted to block until the hotplug script
acknowledged the removal before completing it. Greg KH says hotplug
doesn't work this way, so now it could well be delivered after
everything is over. If it's simpler, we can just do it after.
The other issue I wanted to revisit: we currently send SIGPWR to all
processes which we have to undo the CPU affinity for (with a new
si_info field containing the cpu going down).
The main problem is that a process can call sched_setaffinity on
another (unrelated) task, which might not know about it. One option
would be to only deliver the signal if it's not SIG_DFL for that
process. Another would be not to signal, and expect hotplug scripts
to clean up.
Thoughts?
Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
next parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-20 6:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20040116174446.A2820@in.ibm.com>
2004-01-20 5:44 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2004-01-20 6:33 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20 6:43 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20 6:52 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20 7:11 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20 7:30 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20 7:45 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20 7:54 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20 8:14 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20 8:29 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20 8:37 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20 8:43 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-21 4:06 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2004-01-21 4:14 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-21 5:09 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2004-01-21 7:08 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-21 15:07 ` Matthias Urlichs
2004-01-22 5:29 ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-21 7:09 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-21 7:31 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-21 7:42 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-21 8:11 ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-21 5:07 ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-20 8:41 ` Stefan Smietanowski
2004-01-20 8:49 ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-20 9:12 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-21 0:00 ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-20 23:51 ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-20 7:45 ` Rusty Russell
2004-01-20 8:37 ` Tim Hockin
2004-01-20 9:29 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2004-01-21 0:12 ` Rusty Russell
[not found] <fa.f37o48p.1io5q5@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.frjqvfo.170g8hq@ifi.uio.no>
2004-01-20 17:49 ` Andy Lutomirski
2004-01-21 4:33 ` Rusty Russell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040120060027.91CC717DE5@ozlabs.au.ibm.com \
--to=rusty@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=lhcs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®