[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/5] SUBCPUSETS: a resource control functionality using CPUSETS
    magnus wrote:
    > Maybe it is possible to have an hierarchical model and keep the
    > framework simple and easy to understand while providing guarantees,

    Dinakar's patches to use cpu_exclusive cpusets to define dynamic
    sched domains accomplish something like this.

    What scheduler domains and resource control domains both need
    are non-overlapping subsets of the CPUs and/or Memory Nodes.

    In the case of sched domains, you normally want the subsets
    to cover all the CPUs. You want every CPU to have exactly
    one scheduler that is responsible for its scheduling.

    In the case of resource control domains, you perhaps don't
    care if some CPUs or Memory Nodes have no particular resources
    constraints defined for them. In that case, every CPU and
    every Memory Node maps to _either_ zero or one resource control

    Either way, a 'flat model' non-overlapping partitioning of the
    CPUs and/or Memory Nodes can be obtained from a hierarchical
    model (nested sets of subsets) by selecting some of the subsets
    that don't overlap ;). In /dev/cpuset, this selection is normally
    made by specifying another boolean file (contains '0' or '1')
    that controls whether that cpuset is one of the selected subsets.

    I won't rest till it's the best ...
    Programmer, Linux Scalability
    Paul Jackson <> 1.925.600.0401
    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: 2005-09-09 08:07    [W:0.019 / U:7.720 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site