Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210204010157.1823669-1-aklimov@redhat.com> <YBvCYhdPai+pb8u2@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <YBvCYhdPai+pb8u2@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Alexey Klimov <aklimov@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 12:50:34 +0000
Message-ID: <CAFBcO+_Z1LKqPPwEKq-XGX+RnWQa+vFBVJ9D9y0MNHGUkM_4Jw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu/hotplug: wait for cpuset_hotplug_work to finish on
 cpu onlining
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        yury.norov@gmail.com, Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>,
        tglx@linutronix.de, Joshua Baker <jobaker@redhat.com>,
        audralmitchel@gmail.com, arnd@arndb.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        rafael@kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, lizefan@huawei.com,
        qais.yousef@arm.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
        Alexey Klimov <klimov.linux@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 9:46 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 01:01:57AM +0000, Alexey Klimov wrote:
> > @@ -1281,6 +1282,11 @@ static int cpu_up(unsigned int cpu, enum cpuhp_state target)
> >       err = _cpu_up(cpu, 0, target);
> >  out:
> >       cpu_maps_update_done();
> > +
> > +     /* To avoid out of line uevent */
> > +     if (!err)
> > +             cpuset_wait_for_hotplug();
> > +
> >       return err;
> >  }
> >
>
> > @@ -2071,14 +2075,18 @@ static void cpuhp_online_cpu_device(unsigned int cpu)
> >       struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
> >
> >       dev->offline = false;
> > -     /* Tell user space about the state change */
> > -     kobject_uevent(&dev->kobj, KOBJ_ONLINE);
> >  }
> >
>
> One concequence of this is that you'll now get a bunch of notifications
> across things like suspend/hybernate.

The patch doesn't change the number of kobject_uevent()s. The
userspace will get the same number of uevents as before the patch (at
least if I can rely on my eyes).
Or is there a concern that now the uevents are sent in a row
sequentially which might abuse userspace uevents handling machinery?

Best regards,
Alexey