From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Jesse Larrew <jlarrew@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] rebuild_sched_domains considered dangerous
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 16:47:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1307112469.2353.3402.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DCAB6B0.8020904@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 11:17 -0500, Jesse Larrew wrote:
> > I would really like to see both patch-sets together. Also, I'm not
> at
> > all convinced its a sane thing to do. Pretty much all NUMA aware
> > software I know of assumes that CPU<->NODE relations are static,
> > breaking that in kernel renders all existing software broken.
> >=20
>=20
> I suspect that's true. Then again, shouldn't it be the capabilities of
> the hardware that dictates what the software does, rather than the
> other way around?=20
Wish that were true, we wouldn't be all constrained by all this legacy
software.. ;-)
Anyway, there's plenty of CPU<->NODE assumptions in the kernel as well,
fixing those will be 'interesting' at best, as for userspace, since its
a user-driven tool revamping the topology the user gets to keep the
pieces when he runs that while some NUMA aware proglet is running.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-03 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-09 2:58 [BUG] rebuild_sched_domains considered dangerous Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-03-09 10:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-09 11:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-09 13:15 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-03-09 13:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-09 13:31 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-03-09 13:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-09 13:46 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-03-09 13:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-09 15:26 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-03-09 13:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-10 14:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-20 10:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-20 22:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-05-09 21:26 ` Jesse Larrew
2011-05-10 14:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-11 16:17 ` Jesse Larrew
2011-06-03 14:47 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
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=1307112469.2353.3402.camel@twins \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=jlarrew@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).