lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] Patch for isolated scheduler domains
Date
On Saturday, July 24, 2004 1:26 am, Nick Piggin wrote:
> You might have the theoretical problem of ending up with more than
> one disjoint top level domain (ie. no overlap, basically partitioning
> the CPUs).

Yes, we'll have several disjoint per-node cpu spans for a large system, but
nearby nodes *will* overlap with more distant nodes than any given node, so I
think we're covered, unless I'm misunderstanding something.

> No doubt you could come up with something provably correct, however
> it might just be good enough to examine the end result and check that
> it is good. At least while you test different configurations.

Right. And ultimately, I think we'll want the hierarchy I mentioned in the
comments, that'll cover us a little better I think.

Jesse
-
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 14:04    [W:0.045 / U:0.116 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site