On 07/07, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 07/07, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > > > People who want CPU isolation will likely write > > /sys/devices/virtual/workqueue/cpumask to a reduced set of CPUs, typically > > CPU 0 that is used for housekeeping in nohz full. > > Well, khelper_wq is not WQ_SYSFS, so I am not sure this is possible.
Please ignore, I see the new "workqueue: Create low-level unbound workqueues cpumask" commit... > But this doesn't really matter, people can change cpu affinity. But > "workqueues are handled by housekeeping CPUs" doesn't look right. > > > In fact we should add the code which initialize wq_unbound_cpumask > > to housekeeping_mask automatically. > > Perhaps, but until then the changelog above looks really confusing, > as if workqueue.c already does this automagically ;) Yes. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
