From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
maxk@qualcomm.com, ioe-lkml@rameria.de, sivanich@sgi.com,
a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel@kolivas.org, dfults@sgi.com, devik@cdi.cz,
dino@in.ibm.com, emmanuel.pacaud@univ-poitiers.fr,
deweerdt@free.fr, mingo@elte.hu, colpatch@us.ibm.com,
nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, rostedt@goodmis.org, oleg@tv-sign.ru,
paulmck@us.ibm.com, menage@google.com, rddunlap@osdl.org,
suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may have realtime uses)
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:03:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080604200350.GL20824@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080604124126.0d281a99.pj@sgi.com>
> We (SGI) routinely handle that need with a custom init program,
> invoked with the init= parameter to the booting kernel, which
> sets up cpusets and then invokes the normal (real) init program
> in a cpuset configured to exclude those CPUs and nodes which we
> want to remain unloaded. For example, on a 256 CPU, 64 node
> system, we might have init running on a single node of 4 CPUs,
> and leave the remaining 63 nodes and 252 CPUs isolated from all
> the usual user level daemons started by init.
>
> There is no need for additional kernel changes to accomplish this.
There are no additional changes needed, but you must admit that isolcpus
is a much more elegant solutation for this problem than hijacking init.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-04 19:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-02 2:30 Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may have realtime uses) Paul Jackson
2008-06-02 16:42 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-06-02 18:39 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-02 21:41 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-06-02 21:59 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-03 14:40 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-06-03 17:57 ` Max Krasnyanskiy
2008-06-04 14:00 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-06-04 18:07 ` Stop machine threads are getting preemted by the rt period enforcement Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 18:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-04 18:24 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 18:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-04 20:14 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-02 22:35 ` Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may have realtime uses) Ingo Oeser
2008-06-02 22:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-02 23:04 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-02 23:55 ` Ingo Oeser
2008-06-03 3:32 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-03 23:47 ` Max Krasnyanskiy
2008-06-04 0:41 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 4:32 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 4:47 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 12:18 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-04 17:41 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 18:29 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 18:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-04 19:34 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 18:58 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 19:31 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 19:37 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 19:45 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 20:05 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-04 20:23 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 20:03 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2008-06-04 20:16 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 20:33 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-04 20:38 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 21:16 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 21:17 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 21:20 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 21:26 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 1:18 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-04 3:00 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 16:18 ` Ingo Oeser
2008-06-04 17:47 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-03 6:03 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-04 9:58 ` Mark Hounschell
2008-06-04 17:26 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 21:00 ` Mark Hounschell
2008-06-04 21:03 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 19:26 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 20:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-04 21:44 ` Michael Trimarchi
2008-06-04 21:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-05 11:16 ` Michael Trimarchi
2008-06-05 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-05 14:57 ` Michael Trimarchi
2009-05-08 2:48 ` GeunSik Lim
2008-06-05 11:44 ` Mark Hounschell
2008-06-06 22:28 ` Max Krasnyanskiy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080604200350.GL20824@one.firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=colpatch@us.ibm.com \
--cc=devik@cdi.cz \
--cc=deweerdt@free.fr \
--cc=dfults@sgi.com \
--cc=dino@in.ibm.com \
--cc=emmanuel.pacaud@univ-poitiers.fr \
--cc=ioe-lkml@rameria.de \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maxk@qualcomm.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sivanich@sgi.com \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.