Re: [PATCH 3/4] 2.6.2-rc2-mm2 CPU Hotplug: The Core

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Rusty Russell wrote:

> Wrong migration thread.  The migration thread on CPU 1 has been asked to
> push into CPU 0, which is now going down.

you are right - this one place would have to be aware of CPUs going away.

> Now I've slept on the "do it atomically" idea, I think it's a good one.  
> I've even worked out how to maintain the "last thread on CPU is the idle
> thread", although I'd need to test in code.

good!

> In practice, any app which wants to scale with # CPUs needs to know when
> CPUs are coming up, as well as going down.  Ditto memory, etc. This
> means they need to listen for the hotplug event (DBUS anyone?), or we
> introduce a SIGRECONF (default ignored).  But AFAICT, introducing a new
> signal isn't possible (at least on x86) without breaking glibc.

you can introduce a variable RT signal for this purpose no problem - and
one would want to have a queued signal for this anyway. Ie. by default the
notification is disabled, but a new syscall sets up the process to be
notified of CPU up/down events, on a signal # picked by the app. But this
this indeed is dbus domain ...

	Ingo