From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for kthreadd
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:50:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131017105026.451ce2782d573c0b7dfbbc5d@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131017160726.GJ28963@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:07:28 +0200 Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> Couldn't we instead make kthread children (those created with kthread_create()) to inherit
> kthread initial affinity? Currently kthread's children have cpu_all_mask. We could change
> that behaviour. This way the initial kthread affinity could be inherited all along.
I'm wondering if it's clean/logical to tie usermodehelper affinity to
kthreadd affinity at all. It's certainly convenient, but they're
distinct concepts. What is the reason to not have a separate control
for usermodehelper cpus-allowed?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-17 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-16 14:44 Christoph Lameter
2013-10-16 21:13 ` Andrew Morton
2013-10-16 22:37 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-17 19:23 ` Andrew Morton
2013-11-07 16:43 ` [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for kthreadd V2 Christoph Lameter
2013-11-07 22:50 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-11-08 15:06 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-11-08 16:31 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-11-08 17:05 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-11-08 19:12 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-11-08 19:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-11-08 20:06 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2014-04-08 20:57 ` Andrew Morton
2014-04-08 21:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-17 13:55 ` [PATCH] kmod: Run usermodehelpers only on cpus allowed for kthreadd Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-17 15:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-17 16:07 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-17 17:50 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2013-10-17 18:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-17 22:27 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-10-20 18:00 ` Christoph Lameter
2013-10-17 18:23 ` Christoph Lameter
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=20131017105026.451ce2782d573c0b7dfbbc5d@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bitbucket@online.de \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=gilad@benyossef.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vapier@gentoo.org \
/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