Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752963AbdHXNVP (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:21:15 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:33235 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751197AbdHXNUD (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:20:03 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 15:19:58 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Christopher Lameter Cc: LKML , Peter Zijlstra , Chris Metcalf , Thomas Gleixner , Luiz Capitulino , "Paul E . McKenney" , Ingo Molnar , Mike Galbraith , Rik van Riel , Wanpeng Li Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] housekeeping: Reimplement isolcpus on housekeeping Message-ID: <20170824131955.GA18351@lerouge> References: <1503453071-952-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1503453071-952-13-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 782 Lines: 15 On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 09:55:51AM -0500, Christopher Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 23 Aug 2017, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > While at it, this is a proposition for a reimplementation of isolcpus= > > that doesn't involve scheduler domain isolation. Therefore this > > brings a behaviour change: all user tasks inherit init/1 affinity which > > avoid the isolcpus= range. But if a task later overrides its affinity > > which turns out to intersect an isolated CPU, load balancing may occur > > on it. > > I think that change is good maybe even a bugfix. I had some people be very > surprised when they set affinities to multiple cpus and the processeds > kept sticking to one cpu because of isolcpus. That's good to hear! I'll keep that direction then, unless someone complains.