* Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> wrote:
> > but a single object cannot be allocated both locally and globally!
> > (well, it could be, for read-mostly workloads, but lets ignore that
> > possibility) So instead of letting chance determine it, it is the most
> > natural thing to let the object (or its container) determine which
> > strategy to use - not the workload. This avoids the ambiguity at its
> > core.
>
> We want cpusets to make a round robin allocation within the memory
> assigned to the cpuset. There is no global allocation that I am aware
> of.
i think we might be talking about separate things, so lets go one step
back.
firstly, i think what you call roundrobin is what i call 'global'.
[roundrobin allocation is what is best for a cache that is accessed in a
'global' way - as opposed to cached data that is accessed in a 'local'
way.]
secondly, i'm not sure i understood it correctly why you want to have
all (mostly filesystem related) allocations within selected cpusets go
in a roundrobin way. My understanding so far was that you wanted this
because the workload attached to that cpuset was using the filesystem
objects in a 'global' way: i.e. from many different nodes, with no
particular locality of reference. Am i mistaken about this?
Ingo
-
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]
