Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu] Fix attempt to avoid offloading callbacks unless requested

[Pranith Kumar]

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, Frederic Weisbecker
<fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> I understand that if CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL_ALL is set then CONFIG_NOCB_CPU_ALL
>> will also be set and there is no need for this cpumask_or().
>>
>> Is there any reason for the coupling between CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL_ALL
>> and CONFIG_NOCB_CPU_ALL?
>
> Yeah, for any nohz full CPU, we need the corresponding CPU to be rcu_nocb.
> So if all CPUs are full dynticks, all CPUs must be rcunocb.
>
> That said with this patch, the dependency is perhaps not needed anymore.
>
>>
>> I ask because a user can override CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL_ALL=y at boot time
>> using the nohz_full= boot time parameter.
>
> No, the content of nohz_full= is ignored with CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL_ALL=y.
>

Please correct me if I am wrong but that does not seem to be the case.
If a boot parameter is passed, we are setting up tick_nohz_full_mask
from tick_nohz_full_setup() and marking tick_nohz_full_running as true.
Later on we check this flag and skip the CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL_ALL
initialization.

> That said you made me check and I realize that when that happens, we alloc
> the mask two times and we leak the first. I need to fix that.

This does not actually happen as we do the initialization only once.
Am I missing something?

>
> Thanks.


-- 
Pranith
--
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/