On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 08:09 -0600, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 03:59 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Why per node? Why not go the whole way and make it per CPU?
> >
> > Agreed, for two reasons even
> > 1) Per cpu allows for even more devices and cache locality
> > 2) While few people have a NUMA system, many have an SMP system so you
> > get a lot more testing.
>
> Agreed, the first version was a per cpu one simply so that i could test it
> on a normal SMP system. Andi seems to be of the same opinion, what do you
> think of the hotplug cpu case (explained in previous email)?
you need to cope with hotplug of entire nodes anyway, or hotunplug of
the last cpu of a node. In fact I bet that the administration needed
will be LESS in the per cpu case (since you know it's the only one)
compared to the per node case.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |