From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
"mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"tony.luck@intel.com" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"fenghua.yu@intel.com" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
"schwidefsky@de.ibm.com" <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
"james.hogan@imgtec.com" <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
"cmetcalf@tilera.com" <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
"benh@kernel.crashing.org" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
"linux@arm.linux.org.uk" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] rework sched_domain topology description
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:17:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140311131719.GY9987@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <531B0FDA.2040302@arm.com>
On Sat, Mar 08, 2014 at 12:40:58PM +0000, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> >
> >I don't have a strong opinion about using or not a cpu argument for
> >setting the flags of a level (it was part of the initial proposal
> >before we start to completely rework the build of sched_domain)
> >Nevertheless, I see one potential concern that you can have completely
> >different flags configuration of the same sd level of 2 cpus.
>
> Could you elaborate a little bit further regarding the last sentence? Do you
> think that those completely different flags configuration would make it
> impossible, that the load-balance code could work at all at this sd?
So a problem with such an interfaces is that is makes it far too easy to
generate completely broken domains.
You can, for two cpus in the same domain provide, different flags; such
a configuration doesn't make any sense at all.
Now I see why people would like to have this; but unless we can make it
robust I'd be very hesitant to go this route.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-11 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-05 7:18 [RFC 0/6] rework sched_domain topology description Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 7:18 ` [RFC 1/6] sched: remove unused SCHED_INIT_NODE Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 7:18 ` [PATCH 2/6] sched: rework of sched_domain topology definition Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 17:09 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-06 8:32 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 10:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-11 13:27 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 13:48 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-05 7:18 ` [RFC 3/6] sched: s390: create a dedicated topology table Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 7:18 ` [RFC 4/6] sched: powerpc: " Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 10:08 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-11 13:18 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-12 4:42 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-12 7:44 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-12 11:04 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-14 2:30 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-14 2:14 ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-05 7:18 ` [RFC 5/6] sched: add a new SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN for sched_domain Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 7:18 ` [RFC 6/6] sched: ARM: create a dedicated scheduler topology table Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 22:38 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-06 8:42 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 23:17 ` [RFC 0/6] rework sched_domain topology description Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-06 9:04 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-06 12:31 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-07 2:47 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-08 12:40 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-10 13:21 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 13:17 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-03-12 13:28 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-12 13:47 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-13 14:07 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-17 11:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-19 19:15 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-20 8:28 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 13:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20140311131719.GY9987@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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).