Nick, responding to pj, wrote:
> > However a little bit of additional kernel cpuset code could hide
> > this detail from user space, by recognizing when the user had
> > asked to turn off load balancing on some larger cpuset, and by
> > then calling partition_sched_domains() multiple times, once for
> > each CPU in that cpuset.
>
> Yeah: do all that in cpusets. It's already information you would have
> to derive in order to make it work properly anyway. If you are not
> passing in the singleton domains ATM, then they will not get properly
> detached and isolated.
ok
> It's not a huge deal, but I'd like to keep partition_sched_domains. After
> my patch, it's really simple.
ok
It's a deal.
I've got a couple of brown paper bag bug fixes almost ready to send
out, for the patch I sent Andrew a few days ago:
cpuset and sched domains: sched_load_balance flag
I'll send these in, and then get some sleep and code up these changes
to the partition_sched_domains, along the lines you have recommended.
Thanks, Nick and Ingo.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
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]
