Re: [PATCH 3/3 V8] workqueue: Allow modifying low level unbound workqueue cpumask

From: Lai Jiangshan
Date: Tue Apr 28 2015 - 06:28:23 EST

On 04/28/2015 12:36 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-04-27 at 23:44 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> So, we need an API to modify the wq_unbound_cpumask, and I provided
>>> this public function. Otherwise, the other code can't modify it.
>> I see. I don't have too strong an opinion; however, changing the mask
>> is a fairly heavy operation. Are there specific reasons why we don't
>> want to follow the nohz config right away?
> Isolation is not only applicable to nohz_full. Many loads are
> unsuitable for nohz_full, yet require maximum isolation.
> ATM, nohz_full is not dynamic, but hopefully one day will be. In the
> here and now, we can isolate cores from the scheduler on the fly via
> cpusets, a prime API user candidate.
> -Mike

So, the public function needs to be kept and the EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()
is killed?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at