[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [ckrm-tech] Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] cpusets - big numa cpu and memory placement
    > That makes no sense to me whatsoever, I'm afraid. Why if they were allowed
    > "to steal a few cycles" are they so fervently banned from being in there?

    One substantial advantage of cpusets (as in the kernel patch in *-mm's
    tree), over variations that "just poke the affinity masks from user
    space" is the task->cpuset pointer. This tracks to what cpuset a task
    is attached. The fork and exit code duplicates and nukes this pointer,
    managing the cpuset reference counter.

    It matters to batch schedulers and the like which cpuset a task is in,
    and which tasks are in a cpuset, when it comes time to do things like
    suspend or migrate the tasks currently in a cpuset.

    Just because it's ok to share a little compute time in a cpuset doesn't
    mean you don't care to know who is in it.

    I won't rest till it's the best ...
    Programmer, Linux Scalability
    Paul Jackson <> 1.650.933.1373
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.027 / U:5.704 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site