From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Erich Focht <efocht@ess.nec.de>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Paul Jackson <pj@engr.sgi.com>,
Matthew Dobson <colpatch@us.ibm.com>,
lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] O(1) scheduler set_cpus_allowed for non-current tasks
Date: 20 Feb 2002 14:44:12 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1014234254.18361.43.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0202201826120.7476-100000@sx6.ess.nec.de>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0202201826120.7476-100000@sx6.ess.nec.de>
On Wed, 2002-02-20 at 12:57, Erich Focht wrote:
> The patch is for 2.5.4-K3. I'm actually developing on IA-64 and tested it
> on Itanium systems based on 2.4.17 kernels where it survived my
> tests. I hope this works for i386 and is helpful to someone.
I was working on the same thing myself. I don't have a working
solution, so you beat me, and thus good job. I think we need this, for
various reasons, especially to implement a method of setting task
affinity that we can export to userspace.
I am a little surprised by how much code it took, though. Do we need
the function to act asynchronously? In other words, is it a requirement
that the task reschedule immediately, or only that when it next
reschedules it obeys its affinity?
Also, what is the reason for allowing multiple calls to
set_cpus_allowed? How often would that even occur?
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-20 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-20 17:57 [PATCH] O(1) scheduler set_cpus_allowed for non-current tasks Erich Focht
2002-02-20 19:44 ` Robert Love [this message]
2002-02-20 20:38 ` [Lse-tech] " Paul Jackson
2002-02-21 0:07 ` Erich Focht
2002-02-21 1:12 ` Paul Jackson
2002-02-21 1:40 ` [Lse-tech] " Kimio Suganuma
2002-02-21 2:04 ` Paul Jackson
2002-02-21 2:29 ` Kimio Suganuma
2002-02-21 4:56 ` Reid Hekman
2002-02-23 2:47 ` Rusty Russell
2002-02-25 12:28 ` Dipankar Sarma
2002-02-26 3:59 ` Paul Jackson
2002-02-27 1:40 ` Rusty Russell
2002-02-21 14:38 ` Erich Focht
2002-02-21 16:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-02-21 15:15 ` Erich Focht
2002-02-21 21:05 ` Paul Jackson
2002-02-25 20:01 ` [Lse-tech] " Bill Davidsen
2002-02-21 4:49 ` [Lse-tech] " kravetz
2002-02-21 16:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-02-21 21:25 ` Paul Jackson
2002-02-22 9:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-02-22 19:44 ` [Lse-tech] " Paul Jackson
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=1014234254.18361.43.camel@phantasy \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=colpatch@us.ibm.com \
--cc=efocht@ess.nec.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pj@engr.sgi.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