lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] cpusets - big numa cpu and memory placement
> The idea was to have a system, and run all jobs on it through a batch 
> scheduler. Some jobs cared about performance, some didn't.
>
> The ones who cared about performance got an 'exclusive' cpuset, the ones
> who didn't got a 'non exclusive' cpuset.

OK, makes sense. Thanks for that.

> Of course, in our case, a valid argument is that 'exclusiveness' should
> not be enforced by the kernel but rather by the job scheduler. Probably.
>
> But now I see that the discussion is going towards:
> -fully exclusive cpusets, maybe even with no interrupts handling
> -maybe only allow exclusive cpusets, since non-exclusive cpusets are
> tricky wrt CKRM.

Nope - personally I see us more headed for the exclusive cpusets, and
handle the non-exclusive stuff via a more CKRM-style mechanism. Which
I still think achieves what you need, though perhaps not in exactly the
fashion you envisioned.

M.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:2.699 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site