From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: holt@sgi.com, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, dino@in.ibm.com,
menage@google.com, Simon.Derr@bull.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mbligh@google.com,
rohitseth@google.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com
Subject: Re: exclusive cpusets broken with cpu hotplug
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 01:42:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061019014225.fdff9917.pj@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <453735D8.5040100@yahoo.com.au>
Nick wrote:
> It is this non overlapping property that we can take advantage of, and
> partition the scheduler.
You want non-overlapping versus all other CPUs on the system.
You want to partition the systems CPUs, in the mathematical sense of
the word 'partition', a non-overlapping cover. Fine. That's an
honorable goal.
But cpu_exclusive gives you non-overlapping versus sibling cpusets.
Wrong tool for the job. Close - sounded right - has that nice long
word 'exclusive' in there somewhere. Wrong one however. It made
good sense to anyone that came at this from the kernel/sched.c side,
as it was obvious to them what was needed. To myself and my cpuset
users, it made no bleeping sense whatsoever.
What actual needs do we have here? Lets figure that out, then if that
leads to adding mechanism of the right shape to fit the needs, fine.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-19 8:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-18 2:25 exclusive cpusets broken with cpu hotplug Siddha, Suresh B
2006-10-18 7:14 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-18 9:56 ` Robin Holt
2006-10-18 10:10 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-18 10:53 ` Robin Holt
2006-10-18 21:07 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-19 5:56 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-18 12:16 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-18 14:14 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2006-10-18 14:51 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-19 6:15 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-19 6:35 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-19 6:57 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-19 7:04 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-19 7:33 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-19 8:16 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-19 8:31 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-19 7:34 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-19 8:07 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-19 8:11 ` Paul Jackson
2006-10-19 8:22 ` Nick Piggin
2006-10-19 8:42 ` Paul Jackson [this message]
2006-10-18 17:54 ` Dinakar Guniguntala
2006-10-18 18:05 ` 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=20061019014225.fdff9917.pj@sgi.com \
--to=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=Simon.Derr@bull.net \
--cc=dino@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=holt@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@google.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=rohitseth@google.com \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.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