On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 05:00:29PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
> Currently, when CPUs going offline, the rcu boost kthreads CPU
> affinity has been reset in rcutree_offline_cpu(), therefore this
> commit remove duplicate settings in rcutree_dead_cpu().
>
> Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang1.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>One question...
>
>Given that rcutree_offline_cpu() causes rcu_boost_kthread_setaffinity()
>to be invoked with the number of the outgoing CPU, but rcutree_dead_cpu()
>instead passes in -1, are these two invocations really redundant?
Although -1 is passed in, but at this time, the outgoing CPU has been removed from
rcu_rnp_online_cpus(rnp), in other words, we will eliminate the same CPU, which is
also we passed in cpu in the rcutree_offline_cpu() before.
Thanks
Zqiang
>
> Thanx, paul
> ---
> kernel/rcu/tree.c | 5 -----
> 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> index 65f3dd2fd3ae..20de83ed0c7e 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> @@ -4122,15 +4122,10 @@ static void rcu_cleanup_dead_rnp(struct rcu_node *rnp_leaf)
> */
> int rcutree_dead_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
> {
> - struct rcu_data *rdp = per_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data, cpu);
> - struct rcu_node *rnp = rdp->mynode; /* Outgoing CPU's rdp & rnp. */
> -
> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU))
> return 0;
>
> WRITE_ONCE(rcu_state.n_online_cpus, rcu_state.n_online_cpus - 1);
> - /* Adjust any no-longer-needed kthreads. */
> - rcu_boost_kthread_setaffinity(rnp, -1);
> // Stop-machine done, so allow nohz_full to disable tick.
> tick_dep_clear(TICK_DEP_BIT_RCU);
> return 0;
> --
> 2.25.1
>
