Re: [ckrm-tech] Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] cpusets - big numa cpu and memory placement

Paul Jackson
2005-02-12T06:16:54Z

I agree with 97% of what you write, Chandra.

> one more level of indirection(instead of task->cpuset->cpus_allowed
> it will be task->taskclass->res[CPUSET]->cpus_allowed).

No -- two more levels of indirection (task->cpus_allowed becomes
task->taskclass->res[CPUSET]->cpus_allowed).

> But, for your purposes or our discussions one would need only 3 modules
> of the above (core, rcfs and taskclass).

Ok. That was not obvious to me until now. If there is a section in
your documentation that explains this, and addresses the needs and
motivations of someone trying to reuse portions of CKRM in such a
manner, I missed it. Whatever ...

In any case, on the issue that matters to me right now, we agree:

> It won't be a happy, productive marriage.

Good. Thanks. Good luck to you.

> PS to everyone else: Wow, you have lot of patience :)

For sure.

--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373, 1.925.600.0401