From: Mark Hounschell <markh@compro.net>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Cc: Mark Hounschell <dmarkh@cfl.rr.com>,
nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
ioe-lkml@rameria.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel@kolivas.org, dfults@sgi.com, devik@cdi.cz,
sivanich@sgi.com, dino@in.ibm.com,
emmanuel.pacaud@univ-poitiers.fr, deweerdt@free.fr,
mingo@elte.hu, colpatch@us.ibm.com, maxk@qualcomm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, oleg@tv-sign.ru, paulmck@us.ibm.com,
menage@google.com, rddunlap@osdl.org, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com,
tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may have realtime uses)
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:00:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48470250.6010803@compro.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080604122644.cd73bfb9.pj@sgi.com>
Paul Jackson wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>> What is an abonination, is that cpusets are equired for this type of
>> isolation to begin with, even on a 2 processor machine.
>
> Just to be sure I'm following you here, you stating that you
> want to be able to manipulate the isolated cpu map at runtime,
> not just with the boot option isolcpus, right?
> Where this
> isolated cpu map works just fine even on systems which do
> not have cpusets configured, right?
>
Yes to both questions. However after reading Max and Peter's response, I
guess there is another, probably better or _only_, way to get what I really
need anyway so please don't consider my intrusion into this thread as a NAK.
I do not rely on this option as it is implemented.
Regards
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-04 21:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-02 2:30 Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may have realtime uses) Paul Jackson
2008-06-02 16:42 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-06-02 18:39 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-02 21:41 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-06-02 21:59 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-03 14:40 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-06-03 17:57 ` Max Krasnyanskiy
2008-06-04 14:00 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-06-04 18:07 ` Stop machine threads are getting preemted by the rt period enforcement Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 18:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-04 18:24 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 18:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-04 20:14 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-02 22:35 ` Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may have realtime uses) Ingo Oeser
2008-06-02 22:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-02 23:04 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-02 23:55 ` Ingo Oeser
2008-06-03 3:32 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-03 23:47 ` Max Krasnyanskiy
2008-06-04 0:41 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 4:32 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 4:47 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 12:18 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-04 17:41 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 18:29 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 18:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-04 19:34 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 18:58 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 19:31 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 19:37 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 19:45 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 20:05 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-04 20:23 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 20:03 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-04 20:16 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 20:33 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-04 20:38 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 21:16 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 21:17 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 21:20 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 21:26 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 1:18 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-04 3:00 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 16:18 ` Ingo Oeser
2008-06-04 17:47 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-03 6:03 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-04 9:58 ` Mark Hounschell
2008-06-04 17:26 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 21:00 ` Mark Hounschell [this message]
2008-06-04 21:03 ` Paul Jackson
2008-06-04 19:26 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-06-04 20:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-04 21:44 ` Michael Trimarchi
2008-06-04 21:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-05 11:16 ` Michael Trimarchi
2008-06-05 12:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-05 14:57 ` Michael Trimarchi
2009-05-08 2:48 ` GeunSik Lim
2008-06-05 11:44 ` Mark Hounschell
2008-06-06 22:28 ` Max Krasnyanskiy
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=48470250.6010803@compro.net \
--to=markh@compro.net \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=colpatch@us.ibm.com \
--cc=devik@cdi.cz \
--cc=deweerdt@free.fr \
--cc=dfults@sgi.com \
--cc=dino@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dmarkh@cfl.rr.com \
--cc=emmanuel.pacaud@univ-poitiers.fr \
--cc=ioe-lkml@rameria.de \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maxk@qualcomm.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sivanich@sgi.com \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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