> > But Rusty added this (in 873392ca51), and he knows way more about this
> > stuff than I do.
>
> Actually, I just stopped the code from playing cpumask games, which is
> what it used to do.
You're right the numa_node_id() check ptimization is not 100% safe on preempt
kernels and should be pro
Bjorn Helgaas writes:
> [+cc Rusty]
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Alexander Duyck
> wrote:
>> This patch is meant to address the fact that we are making unnecessary calls
>> to work_on_cpu. To resolve this I have added a check to see if the current
>> node is the correct node for the devi
On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 17:36 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> It seems a little strange to me that this "run the driver probe method
> on the correct node" code is in PCI. I would think this behavior
> would be desirable for *all* bus types, not just PCI, so maybe it
> would make sense to do this up i
[+cc Rusty]
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Alexander Duyck
wrote:
> This patch is meant to address the fact that we are making unnecessary calls
> to work_on_cpu. To resolve this I have added a check to see if the current
> node is the correct node for the device before we decide to assign the
This patch is meant to address the fact that we are making unnecessary calls
to work_on_cpu. To resolve this I have added a check to see if the current
node is the correct node for the device before we decide to assign the probe
task to another CPU.
The advantages to this approach is that we can
5 matches
Mail list logo