Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:34:46 -0700 | From | "Martin J. Bligh" <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |