On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 15:43 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 06:26:41AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 19:23 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:47:29AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 06:08:31PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: > > > > > Acked-by: Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Thank you all, queued for 3.15. > > > > > > > > We should also have some facility for moving the SRCU workqueues to > > > > housekeeping/timekeeping kthreads in the NO_HZ_FULL case. Or does > > > > this patch already have that effect? > > > > > > Kevin Hilman and me plan to try to bring a new Kconfig option that could > > > let > > > us control the unbound workqueues affinity through sysfs. > > > > Handing control to the user seemed like a fine thing, so I started > > making a boot option to enable it. Forcing WQ_SYSFS on at sysfs > > decision spot doesn't go well, init order matters :) Post init frobbing > > required if you want to see/frob all unbound. > > I'm curious about the details. Is that because some workqueues are registered > before sysfs is even initialized?
Yeah. I put in a test, and told it if not ready, go get ready and flag yourself as having BTDT (one registration being plenty), but that only made a different explosion. Post-init rescan is definitely a better plan, it can't be worse :) -Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
