Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265277AbUATIoO (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2004 03:44:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265296AbUATIoO (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2004 03:44:14 -0500 Received: from [66.35.79.110] ([66.35.79.110]:43434 "EHLO www.hockin.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265277AbUATIoL (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2004 03:44:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:43:52 -0800 From: Tim Hockin To: Nick Piggin Cc: Rusty Russell , vatsa@in.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, rml@tech9.net Subject: Re: CPU Hotplug: Hotplug Script And SIGPWR Message-ID: <20040120084352.GD15733@hockin.org> References: <20040120063316.GA9736@hockin.org> <400CCE2F.2060502@cyberone.com.au> <20040120065207.GA10993@hockin.org> <400CD4B5.6020507@cyberone.com.au> <20040120073032.GB12638@hockin.org> <400CDCA1.5070200@cyberone.com.au> <20040120075409.GA13897@hockin.org> <400CE354.8060300@cyberone.com.au> <20040120082943.GA15733@hockin.org> <400CE8DC.70307@cyberone.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <400CE8DC.70307@cyberone.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1448 Lines: 36 On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 07:37:48PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > (or OOM killed being another that comes to mind) > > It is sometimes inevitable. With that knowledge we should be designing > for graceful failure. Don't get me started on OOM killer. If the OOM killer is killing hotplug scripts, there's another problem. What's the chance of hotplug scripts being the memory hog? :) That said, I understand what you're saying. It's rough. > >But it is a violation of the affinity. As the kernel we CAN NOT know what > >the affinity really means. > > Not if the application is designed to handle it. How would hotplug > scripts make this any different, anyway? IFF the app is designed to handle it. The existence of a SIGPWR handler does not necessarily imply that, though. a SIGCPU or something might correlate 1:1 with this, but SIGPWR doesn't. Solving it from hotplug scripts means the task's affinity is not automatically violated. It means the decision to violate the affinity was made in user-space, probably by the admin, who CAN know what the affinity means. > Rusty thought you just wouldn't send it unless the process was handling > it. I remembered that after I sent it, sorry. :) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/