Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 14:22:15 +0100 From: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> To: Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>, Peter Holm <pho@freebsd.org>, Florian Smeets <flo@smeets.im> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Kernel threads inherit CPU affinity from random sibling Message-ID: <CAJ-FndD3366-uT191jMva3P-uL0DHi6nFeRfdsKA1hbJW7WqEA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAFMmRNyPkwx3hRtraq6QL64kibAeV3W23FE34T1oDnf9SVFOYg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAFMmRNxF1uMOr39BbZkpPN=uM7G09dtcckAYw8ag6n6bi=FeOw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-FndDHsQRRNmrS7fsELEVohozWvvfaZ6eW_GipwHdjU9ZwxA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFMmRNyPkwx3hRtraq6QL64kibAeV3W23FE34T1oDnf9SVFOYg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2012/1/28 Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 10:41 PM, Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> wrote= : >> I think what you found out is very sensitive. >> However, the patch is not correct as you cannot call >> cpuset_setthread() with thread_lock held. > > Whoops! =C2=A0I actually discovered that for myself and had already fixed > it, but apparently I included an old version of the patch in the > email. > >> Hence this is my fix: >> http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/cpuset_root.patch > > Oh, I do like this better. =C2=A0I tried something similar myself but > abandoned it because I misread how sched_affinity() was implemented by > 4BSD(I had gotten the impression that once TSF_AFFINITY is set it > could never be cleared). Do you have a pathological test-case for it? Are you going to test the patc= h? Thanks, Attilio --=20 Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-FndD3366-uT191jMva3P-uL0DHi6nFeRfdsKA1hbJW7WqEA>