Re: [Patch v2 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs

2020-06-23 Thread Nitesh Narayan Lal
On 6/23/20 5:21 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 07:45:08PM -0400, Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote: >> From: Alex Belits >> >> The current implementation of cpumask_local_spread() does not respect the >> isolated CPUs, i.e., even if a CPU has been isolated for Real-Time task, >> it

Re: [Patch v2 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs

2020-06-23 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 07:45:08PM -0400, Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote: > From: Alex Belits > > The current implementation of cpumask_local_spread() does not respect the > isolated CPUs, i.e., even if a CPU has been isolated for Real-Time task, > it will return it to the caller for pinning of its

[Patch v2 1/3] lib: Restrict cpumask_local_spread to houskeeping CPUs

2020-06-22 Thread Nitesh Narayan Lal
From: Alex Belits The current implementation of cpumask_local_spread() does not respect the isolated CPUs, i.e., even if a CPU has been isolated for Real-Time task, it will return it to the caller for pinning of its IRQ threads. Having these unwanted IRQ threads on an isolated CPU adds up to a