From: Mark Hounschell <markh@compro.net>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Cc: Mark Hounschell <dmarkh@cfl.rr.com>,
nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
ioe-lkml@rameria.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel@kolivas.org, dfults@sgi.com, devik@cdi.cz,
sivanich@sgi.com, dino@in.ibm.com,
emmanuel.pacaud@univ-poitiers.fr, deweerdt@free.fr,
mingo@elte.hu, colpatch@us.ibm.com, maxk@qualcomm.com,
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, 04 Jun 2008 17:00:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48470250.6010803@compro.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080604122644.cd73bfb9.pj@sgi.com>
Paul Jackson wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>> What is an abonination, is that cpusets are equired for this type of
>> isolation to begin with, even on a 2 processor machine.
>
> Just to be sure I'm following you here, you stating that you
> want to be able to manipulate the isolated cpu map at runtime,
> not just with the boot option isolcpus, right?
> Where this
> isolated cpu map works just fine even on systems which do
> not have cpusets configured, right?
>
Yes to both questions. However after reading Max and Peter's response, I
guess there is another, probably better or _only_, way to get what I really
need anyway so please don't consider my intrusion into this thread as a NAK.
I do not rely on this option as it is implemented.
Regards
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-04 21:10 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
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 [this message]
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=48470250.6010803@compro.net \
--to=markh@compro.net \
--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=dmarkh@cfl.rr.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.