From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757113AbYE3GwU (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 May 2008 02:52:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753730AbYE3GwH (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 May 2008 02:52:07 -0400 Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.171.30]:52141 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753694AbYE3GwG (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 May 2008 02:52:06 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 01:52:00 -0500 From: Paul Jackson To: Max Krasnyansky Cc: mingo@elte.hu, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, menage@google.com, rostedt@goodmis.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Give cpusets exclusive control over sched domains (ie remove cpu_isolated_map) Message-Id: <20080530015200.f299afed.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <483F8178.7040300@qualcomm.com> References: <1212085023-22284-1-git-send-email-maxk@qualcomm.com> <1212085023-22284-2-git-send-email-maxk@qualcomm.com> <1212085023-22284-3-git-send-email-maxk@qualcomm.com> <20080529173759.ccbaf8ef.pj@sgi.com> <483F3559.1030806@qualcomm.com> <20080529191211.080ec5cf.pj@sgi.com> <483F8178.7040300@qualcomm.com> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.12.0; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Max replied: > > I did not see your reply. Did you send it to me or lkml? > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121207910616332&w=2 Ah - ok - I got that reply, and then lost track of it. My bad. Max wrote, in that earlier reply: > Since we do not plan on supporting it I'd say lets get rid of it. This doesn't make sense to me. We don't just decree that we aren't planning on supporting something that's already out there and being used, and then remove it, on the grounds we aren't supporting it. Faceless beauracracies can get away with that ... we can do better. > > My concern is removing user visible features, without > > good reason and careful consideration and some planning. > I understand. How would you plan for this ? I don't plan for removing it yet, because I haven't seen a good reason to remove it. > Did you get a chance to look at patch that addresses hotplug/domain issues ? Not yet. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.940.382.4214