Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 8 Sep 2005 22:55:39 -0700 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [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 domain.
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 <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 - 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/
| |