From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, karim@opersys.com,
Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Restricted hard realtime
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:18:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041024181842.GB1262@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041023201724.GA23936@elte.hu>
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 10:17:24PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > + bool "Reserve a CPU for hard realtime processes"
>
> this has been implemented in a clean way already: check out the
> "isolcpus=" boot option & scheduler feature (implemented by Dimitri
> Sivanich) which isolates a set of CPUs via sched-domains for precisely
> such purposes. The way to enter such a domain is via the affinity
> syscall - and balancing will leave such domains isolated.
Thanks again for the pointer, am slowly getting my head around this.
I haven't proven to myself that the isolcpus code gets rid of all of the
cross-runqueue lock acquisitions, but it certainly gets rid of a large
number of them. It doesn't seem to do system-call or exception-handler
offload, but it does help me see how to do this sort of thing cleanly.
Dimitri, one nit so far... Why is sched_domain_dummy under two
layers of #ifdef CONFIG_SMP? Any reason why the attached patch
would not be in order?
Thanx, Paul
diff -urpN -X ../dontdiff linux-2.5-2004.10.23/kernel/sched.c linux-2.5-2004.10.23-LBinf/kernel/sched.c
--- linux-2.5-2004.10.23/kernel/sched.c Sat Oct 23 13:23:31 2004
+++ linux-2.5-2004.10.23-LBinf/kernel/sched.c Sun Oct 24 10:50:12 2004
@@ -4437,14 +4437,12 @@ static void sched_domain_debug(void)
#define sched_domain_debug() {}
#endif
-#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
/*
* Initial dummy domain for early boot and for hotplug cpu. Being static,
* it is initialized to zero, so all balancing flags are cleared which is
* what we want.
*/
static struct sched_domain sched_domain_dummy;
-#endif
#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
/*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-24 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-23 19:47 Paul E. McKenney
2004-10-23 20:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-23 20:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2004-10-24 18:18 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2004-10-25 12:26 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2004-10-23 20:22 ` Thomas Gleixner
2004-10-23 21:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2004-10-23 22:06 ` Jon Masters
2004-10-24 15:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2004-10-24 21:08 ` Jon Masters
2004-10-24 21:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-24 21:49 ` Jon Masters
2004-10-24 21:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2004-10-27 3:16 ` Karim Yaghmour
2004-10-27 4:29 ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-27 8:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-28 11:59 ` Karim Yaghmour
2004-10-28 13:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-28 11:54 ` Karim Yaghmour
2004-10-28 13:04 ` john cooper
2004-10-27 22:35 ` Bill Huey
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=20041024181842.GB1262@us.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=karim@opersys.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sivanich@sgi.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
Powered by JetHome