On 9/24/20 8:11 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 02:11:23PM -0400, Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote:
>> Introduce a new API hk_num_online_cpus(), that can be used to
>> retrieve the number of online housekeeping CPUs that are meant to handle
>> managed IRQ jobs.
>>
>> This API is introduced for the drivers that were previously relying only
>> on num_online_cpus() to determine the number of MSIX vectors to create.
>> In an RT environment with large isolated but fewer housekeeping CPUs this
>> was leading to a situation where an attempt to move all of the vectors
>> corresponding to isolated CPUs to housekeeping CPUs were failing due to
>> per CPU vector limit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> include/linux/sched/isolation.h | 13 +++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/isolation.h b/include/linux/sched/isolation.h
>> index cc9f393e2a70..2e96b626e02e 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/sched/isolation.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/sched/isolation.h
>> @@ -57,4 +57,17 @@ static inline bool housekeeping_cpu(int cpu, enum hk_flags flags)
>> return true;
>> }
>>
>> +static inline unsigned int hk_num_online_cpus(void)
>> +{
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_ISOLATION
>> + const struct cpumask *hk_mask;
>> +
>> + if (static_branch_unlikely(&housekeeping_overridden)) {
>> + hk_mask = housekeeping_cpumask(HK_FLAG_MANAGED_IRQ);
> HK_FLAG_MANAGED_IRQ should be pass as an argument to the function:
>
> housekeeping_num_online_cpus(HK_FLAG_MANAGED_IRQ) because it's
> completely arbitrary otherwise.
Yeap that is more sensible, I will do that.
Do you have any other concerns/suggestions on any other patch?
>
>> + return cpumask_weight(hk_mask);
>> + }
>> +#endif
>> + return cpumask_weight(cpu_online_mask);
>> +}
>> +
>> #endif /* _LINUX_SCHED_ISOLATION_H */
>> --
>> 2.18.2
>>
--
Thanks
Nitesh
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
