Re: [PATCH] stop on cpu lost

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:04:31 -0500
Nathan Lynch <ntl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> > Sounds like we are getting nowhere.  The sysctl knob might
> > have to be the answer.
> 
> I don't like having the kernel forcibly kill or stop tasks for this
> case, regardless of whether the behavior is configurable.  What I
> originally meant to suggest was a sysctl knob which will control
> whether the offline will fail in this situation. 
Okay, stop_on_cpu_lost patcfh is not good anyway.
Andrew, could you drop stop_on_cpu_lost patch ?

>From this discussion, it seems there is a direction. 
I'll update my avoid_cpu_removal_if_busy patch and add sysctl for it.

> But I'm still more inclined to leave the kernel's handling of this as it
> stands, since this is policy that can be implemented in userspace.
> 
A program to walk through all tasks and check thier allowd_cpus ?

> We need to preserve the current behavior as the default, in any case.
> 
I agree here.

-Kame

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/