Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030383AbWEKRTc (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2006 13:19:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030384AbWEKRTc (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2006 13:19:32 -0400 Received: from proof.pobox.com ([207.106.133.28]:45764 "EHLO proof.pobox.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030383AbWEKRTc (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 May 2006 13:19:32 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 12:19:20 -0500 From: Nathan Lynch To: Ashok Raj Cc: Andrew Morton , Shaohua Li , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zwane@linuxpower.ca, vatsa@in.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/10] bulk cpu removal support Message-ID: <20060511171920.GB10833@localdomain> References: <1147067137.2760.77.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> <20060510230606.076271b2.akpm@osdl.org> <20060511095308.A15483@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060511095308.A15483@unix-os.sc.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1454 Lines: 33 Ashok Raj wrote: > On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 11:06:06PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > > Shaohua Li wrote: > > > > > > CPU hotremove will migrate tasks and redirect interrupts off dead cpu. > > > > This seems an awful lot of code for something which happens so infrequently. > > > > How big is the problem you're fixing here, and what are the > > user-observeable effects of these changes? > > This is useful when say a NUMA node is being removed. With new multi-core > CPUs comming up, considering a 2 core with HT, we could have up to 4 logical > per socket. On NUMA node with 4 sockets, a node removal will mean we > do 16 single cpu offlines. Each time the process and interrupts could > end up on a CPU that might be removed just immediatly. But offlining all the cpus in a node is already something that just works. If the user is all that concerned about not thrashing the tasks running on that node, they would have a workload manager that migrates the tasks off the node before shooting down cpus. Similar argument applies to interrupt affinity. I really haven't seen a compelling argument for why this is needed, just a bunch of handwaving so far, 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/