Hi,
> > In theory at least, I applaud Magnus's work here. The assymetry of the
> > SMP/NUMA define structure has always annoyed me slightly, and only been
> > explainable in my view as a consequence of the historical order of
> > development. I had a PC with a second memory board in an ISA slot,
> > which would qualify as a one CPU, two Memory Node system.
> >
> > Or what byte us in the future (that PC was a long time ago), the kinks
> > in the current setup might be a hitch in our side as we extend to
> > increasingly interesting architectures.
>
> Nice to hear that you like the idea.
>
> Maybe I should have broken down my patches into three smaller sets:
>
> 1) i386: NUMA without SMP
> 2) CPUSETS: NUMA || SMP
> 3) i386: NUMA emulation
>
> If people like 1) then it's probably a good idea to convert other
> architectures too. Both 2) and 3) above are separate but related
> issues. And now seems like a good time to solve 2).
>
> So, Paul, please let me know if you prefer SMP || NUMA or no
> depencencies in the Kconfig. When I know that I will create a new
> patch that hopefully can get into -mm later on.
The latter seems a good idea to me if you're going to enhance CPUSETS
acceptable for CPUMETER or something like that.
Thanks.
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
