From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Hubertus Franke <frankeh@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 13:21:39 +0000
Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] Re: CPUSET Proposal
Message-Id: <marc-linux-ia64-106449650531869@msgid-missing>
List-Id: <linux-ia64.vger.kernel.org>
References: <marc-linux-ia64-106444308519469@msgid-missing>
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-106444308519469@msgid-missing>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org

Paul Jackson wrote:

>>It's meant to flatten the hierarchy ...
>> ...
>>The hierarchy is meant to be there, just ...
>>    
>>
>
>
>_What_ is meant to flatten the hierarchy ??  To what does "It" refer ??
>
>So is the hierarchy of CKRM there or not -- you've confused me.
>
>And in any case, are we in agreement that any such CKRM hierarchy
>is not isomorphic to the cpuset hierarchy?
>
>  
>
No hierarchy in CKRM  (as of now).

IHMO     even if we introduce a hierarchies in CKRM, I don't see that 
they are isomorphic to cpuset
hiearchies.

-- Hubertus Franke ( CKRM team )      c