Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Feb 2006 00:29:11 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/5] cpuset memory spread basic implementation |
| |
* Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com> wrote:
> > but a single object cannot be allocated both locally and globally! > > (well, it could be, for read-mostly workloads, but lets ignore that > > possibility) So instead of letting chance determine it, it is the most > > natural thing to let the object (or its container) determine which > > strategy to use - not the workload. This avoids the ambiguity at its > > core. > > We want cpusets to make a round robin allocation within the memory > assigned to the cpuset. There is no global allocation that I am aware > of.
i think we might be talking about separate things, so lets go one step back.
firstly, i think what you call roundrobin is what i call 'global'. [roundrobin allocation is what is best for a cache that is accessed in a 'global' way - as opposed to cached data that is accessed in a 'local' way.]
secondly, i'm not sure i understood it correctly why you want to have all (mostly filesystem related) allocations within selected cpusets go in a roundrobin way. My understanding so far was that you wanted this because the workload attached to that cpuset was using the filesystem objects in a 'global' way: i.e. from many different nodes, with no particular locality of reference. Am i mistaken about this?
Ingo - 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/
| |