search for: try_to_freeze_tasks

Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "try_to_freeze_tasks".

2016 Apr 01
2
[PATCH v3 5/6] virt, sched: add cpu pinning to smp_call_sync_on_phys_cpu()
...f the construct. At > > this point you might as well use the regular IPI stuff. > > Main reason for disabling preemption was to avoid any suspend/resume > cycles while vcpu pinning is active. > > With the switch to workqueues this might not be necessary, if I've read > try_to_freeze_tasks() correctly. Can you confirm, please? This is not something we should worry about; the caller should ensure the CPU stays valid; typically I would expect a caller to do get_online_cpus() before 'computing' what CPU to send the function to. > > So I would propose you add: > >...
2016 Apr 01
2
[PATCH v3 5/6] virt, sched: add cpu pinning to smp_call_sync_on_phys_cpu()
...f the construct. At > > this point you might as well use the regular IPI stuff. > > Main reason for disabling preemption was to avoid any suspend/resume > cycles while vcpu pinning is active. > > With the switch to workqueues this might not be necessary, if I've read > try_to_freeze_tasks() correctly. Can you confirm, please? This is not something we should worry about; the caller should ensure the CPU stays valid; typically I would expect a caller to do get_online_cpus() before 'computing' what CPU to send the function to. > > So I would propose you add: > >...
2016 Apr 01
2
[PATCH v3 5/6] virt, sched: add cpu pinning to smp_call_sync_on_phys_cpu()
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 09:14:33AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > --- a/kernel/smp.c > +++ b/kernel/smp.c > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ > #include <linux/smp.h> > #include <linux/cpu.h> > #include <linux/sched.h> > +#include <linux/hypervisor.h> > > #include "smpboot.h" > > @@ -758,9 +759,14 @@ struct smp_sync_call_struct { >
2016 Apr 01
2
[PATCH v3 5/6] virt, sched: add cpu pinning to smp_call_sync_on_phys_cpu()
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 09:14:33AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > --- a/kernel/smp.c > +++ b/kernel/smp.c > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ > #include <linux/smp.h> > #include <linux/cpu.h> > #include <linux/sched.h> > +#include <linux/hypervisor.h> > > #include "smpboot.h" > > @@ -758,9 +759,14 @@ struct smp_sync_call_struct { >
2016 Apr 01
0
[PATCH v3 5/6] virt, sched: add cpu pinning to smp_call_sync_on_phys_cpu()
...which greatly limits the utility of the construct. At > this point you might as well use the regular IPI stuff. Main reason for disabling preemption was to avoid any suspend/resume cycles while vcpu pinning is active. With the switch to workqueues this might not be necessary, if I've read try_to_freeze_tasks() correctly. Can you confirm, please? > You can easily avoid this constraint by using: > > hypervisor_pin_vcpu(smp_processor_id()); > > Also, for the vpinning stuff, the UP version below is sufficient, even > on SMP systems (with the current !preempt constraint). Which seems t...
2016 Apr 01
0
[PATCH v3 5/6] virt, sched: add cpu pinning to smp_call_sync_on_phys_cpu()
...gt;> this point you might as well use the regular IPI stuff. >> >> Main reason for disabling preemption was to avoid any suspend/resume >> cycles while vcpu pinning is active. >> >> With the switch to workqueues this might not be necessary, if I've read >> try_to_freeze_tasks() correctly. Can you confirm, please? > > This is not something we should worry about; the caller should ensure > the CPU stays valid; typically I would expect a caller to do > get_online_cpus() before 'computing' what CPU to send the function to. Okay. > >>> So...