On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 06:44:27PM +0530, Dinakar Guniguntala wrote:
>
>
> > On the other hand, Dinakar had more work to do than you might, because
> > he needed a complete covering (so had to round up cpus in non exclusive
> > cpusets to form more covering elements). From what I can tell, you
> > don't need a complete covering - it seems fine if some cpus are not
> > managed by this resource control function.
>
>
> I think it makes more sense to add this functionality directly as part
> of the existing cpusets instead of creating further leaf cpusets (or subcpusets
> as you call it) where we can specify resource control parameters. I think that
> approach would be much more intuitive and simple to work with rather than
> what you have currently.
If what subcpusets is doing is slicing cpusets resources, then wouldn't
it be more intusive to call them slice0, slice1 etc. under the
respective cpuset ?
Thanks
Dipankar
-
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]
| |
 |