From: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@redhat.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v13 0/9] timers: Exclude isolated cpus from timer migration
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 15:03:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5ee084ed5fea93aced2a3d78ddb480e84b57a68c.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aQS-M_6_97ZLk0yH@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, 2025-10-31 at 14:48 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Le Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 01:57:50PM -0400, Waiman Long a écrit :
> > These 2 cpuset patches are actually independent of the timer related
> > changes. The purpose of these two patches are to prevent the cpuset code
> > from adding isolated CPUs in such a way that all the nohz_full HK CPUs
> > become domain-isolated. This is a corner case that normal users won't try to
> > do. The patches are just an insurance policy to ensure that users can't do
> > that. This is complementary to the sched/isolation patch that limits what
> > CPUs can be put to the isolcpus and nohz_full boot parameters. All these
> > patches are independent of the timer related changes, though you can say
> > that the solution will only be complete if all the pieces are in place.
>
> Right but there will be a conflict if the timer patches don't have
> the rename of update_unbound_workqueue_cpumask().
>
Waiman, are you referring to [1]?
Since that is an RFC, couldn't you just take in those patches before merging [1]
and adapt just that one directly in the cpuset tree? I guess git should figure
it out if we keep my cpuset patches in both trees (or at least 5/9), as long as
the conflicts come in later commits.
Different story is if you already took some conflicting patches in, then I can
look into rebasing as Frederic suggests.
Thanks,
Gabriele
[1] -
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20251025064844.495525-8-chenridong@huaweicloud.com
> > There are another set of pending cpuset patches from Chen Ridong that does
> > some restructuring of the cpuset code that will likely have some conflicts
> > with these 2 patches. So I would like to settle the cpuset changes to avoid
> > future conflicts.
>
> Ok so it looks like there will be conflicts eventually during the merge
> window. In that case it makes sense to take Gabriel cpuset patches but
> he'll need to rebase the rest on top of the timer tree.
>
> Thanks.
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Longman
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-31 14:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-20 11:27 Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-20 11:27 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 1/9] timers/migration: Postpone online/offline callbacks registration to late initcall Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-30 14:07 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-10-20 11:27 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 2/9] timers: Rename tmigr 'online' bit to 'available' Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-20 11:27 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 3/9] timers: Add the available mask in timer migration Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-20 11:27 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 4/9] timers: Use scoped_guard when setting/clearing the tmigr available flag Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-20 11:27 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 5/9] cgroup/cpuset: Rename update_unbound_workqueue_cpumask() to update_exclusion_cpumasks() Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-20 11:27 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 6/9] sched/isolation: Force housekeeping if isolcpus and nohz_full don't leave any Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-20 11:28 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 7/9] cgroup/cpuset: Fail if isolated and nohz_full don't leave any housekeeping Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-20 11:28 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 8/9] cpumask: Add initialiser to use cleanup helpers Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-20 11:28 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 9/9] timers: Exclude isolated cpus from timer migration Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-30 2:56 ` [RESEND PATCH v13 0/9] " Waiman Long
2025-10-30 14:12 ` Frederic Weisbecker
[not found] ` <5457560d-f48a-4a99-8756-51b1017a6aab@redhat.com>
2025-10-30 16:09 ` Gabriele Monaco
2025-10-30 16:37 ` Waiman Long
2025-10-30 17:10 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-10-30 17:57 ` Waiman Long
2025-10-31 13:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-10-31 14:03 ` Gabriele Monaco [this message]
2025-10-31 16:14 ` Waiman Long
2025-10-30 17:08 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=5ee084ed5fea93aced2a3d78ddb480e84b57a68c.camel@redhat.com \
--to=gmonaco@redhat.com \
--cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llong@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®