From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759536AbXJaAEQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:04:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759561AbXJaADr (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:03:47 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:54238 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759077AbXJaADp (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:03:45 -0400 Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 17:03:43 -0700 From: Paul Jackson To: David Rientjes Cc: Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com, clameter@sgi.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ak@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option Message-Id: <20071030170343.fac64402.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20071025185506.8c373aa8.pj@sgi.com> <1193412644.5032.13.camel@localhost> <20071026120037.7b95a136.pj@sgi.com> <1193433239.5032.95.camel@localhost> <1193434278.5032.106.camel@localhost> <1193670617.5035.38.camel@localhost> <20071029114109.46285026.pj@sgi.com> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.3; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David wrote: > That's what Choice C is intended to replace Yes, one remaps nodes it can't provide, and the other removes nodes it can't provide. Yup - that's a logical difference. So ... I would think that the only solution that would be satisfactory to apps that require specific hardware nodes would be to simply not move them in the first place. If you do that, then none of these Choices matter in the slightest. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.925.600.0401