Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Message-ID: <6936d198-7ae4-e022-20d5-e60c17f119e8@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 May 2022 10:21:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] cpuset: Support RCU-NOCB toggle on v2 root
 partitions
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc:     Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
        Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@bytedance.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org>,
        Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenz@kernel.org>,
        rcu@vger.kernel.org
References: <Yo/FGcG+uiBh88sT@slm.duckdns.org>
 <20220526225141.GA1214445@lothringen> <YpAHEt0j30vBw9au@slm.duckdns.org>
 <9e44bb00-955a-dbc6-a863-be649e0c701f@redhat.com>
 <YpAdSW8JXVPOoNJl@slm.duckdns.org>
 <20220527083018.n43nc73vuuzm5ixo@localhost.localdomain>
 <YpIwsiaY2IPK96WO@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20220530004049.GA1251147@lothringen>
 <YpR8PUlIraYE2+5L@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20220530105650.GA1257179@lothringen>
 <YpTDq6Z/+hp+CHwf@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <YpTDq6Z/+hp+CHwf@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 5/30/22 09:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 12:56:50PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
>>> This is ABI, you can't walk back on it. I would suggest starting with an
>>> 'all feature' isolation. Only if there's real demand for something more
>>> fine-grained add that on top. Simple first etc.
>> That's actually my worry. If we start with an all in one ABI, how do we later
>> mix that up with more finegrained features? Like what will be the behaviour of:
>>
>> cpuset.isolation.rcu_nocb = 0
>> cpuset.isolation.all = 1
> Well clearly that doesn't make sense. I was more thinking along the
> lines of cgroup.subtree_control, where instead all features are enabled
> by default.
>
> But only if there's a real usecase, otherwise there's no point in
> providing such knobs.

I am actually thinking about extending the cpuset partition interface 
for isolation. Right now, I have an outstanding patch [1] to add an 
"isolated" state to partition which disable load balancing somewhat 
similar to isolcpus command line option. In the future, we can add 
attribute to the isolation state like "isolated:full" to similar to 
nohz_full currently. If the needs arise, we can even  extend the 
attribute to allow list like "isolated:rcu_nocbs". I don't think it is 
good idea to keep on adding new cpuset control files extensively. I 
would prefer extending the existing ones.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220510153413.400020-1-longman@redhat.com/

Cheers,
Longman