Hi Andrew,

在 2020/6/25 3:26, Andrew Morton 写道:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:23:29 -0400 Nitesh Narayan Lal <nit...@redhat.com> 
> wrote:
> 
>> From: Alex Belits <abel...@marvell.com>
>>
>> The current implementation of cpumask_local_spread() does not respect the
>> isolated CPUs, i.e., even if a CPU has been isolated for Real-Time task,
>> it will return it to the caller for pinning of its IRQ threads. Having
>> these unwanted IRQ threads on an isolated CPU adds up to a latency
>> overhead.
>>
>> Restrict the CPUs that are returned for spreading IRQs only to the
>> available housekeeping CPUs.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> --- a/lib/cpumask.c
>> +++ b/lib/cpumask.c
>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/export.h>
>>  #include <linux/memblock.h>
>>  #include <linux/numa.h>
>> +#include <linux/sched/isolation.h>
>>  
>>  /**
>>   * cpumask_next - get the next cpu in a cpumask
>> @@ -205,22 +206,27 @@ void __init free_bootmem_cpumask_var(cpumask_var_t 
>> mask)
>>   */
>>  unsigned int cpumask_local_spread(unsigned int i, int node)
>>  {
>> -    int cpu;
>> +    int cpu, hk_flags;
>> +    const struct cpumask *mask;
>>  
>> +    hk_flags = HK_FLAG_DOMAIN | HK_FLAG_WQ;
>> +    mask = housekeeping_cpumask(hk_flags);
>>      /* Wrap: we always want a cpu. */
>> -    i %= num_online_cpus();
>> +    i %= cpumask_weight(mask);
>>  
>>      if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
>> -            for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_online_mask)
>> +            for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) {
>>                      if (i-- == 0)
>>                              return cpu;
>> +            }
>>      } else {
>>              /* NUMA first. */
>> -            for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpumask_of_node(node), cpu_online_mask)
>> +            for_each_cpu_and(cpu, cpumask_of_node(node), mask) {
>>                      if (i-- == 0)
>>                              return cpu;
>> +            }
>>  
>> -            for_each_cpu(cpu, cpu_online_mask) {
>> +            for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) {
>>                      /* Skip NUMA nodes, done above. */
>>                      if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, cpumask_of_node(node)))
>>                              continue;
> 
> Are you aware of these changes to cpu_local_spread()?
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1582768688-2314-1-git-send-email-zhangshao...@hisilicon.com/
> 
> I don't see a lot of overlap but it would be nice for you folks to

Yeah, it's a different issue from Nitesh. About our's patch, it has been
linux-next long time, will it be merged in Linus's tree?

Thanks,
Shaokun

> check each other's homework ;)
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 

Reply via email to