lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch 2/2] cpusets: add interleave_over_allowed option
David wrote:
> That's what Choice C is intended to replace

Yes, one remaps nodes it can't provide, and the other removes
nodes it can't provide.

Yup - that's a logical difference. So ... I would think that
the only solution that would be satisfactory to apps that require
specific hardware nodes would be to simply not move them in the
first place. If you do that, then none of these Choices matter
in the slightest.

--
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-31 01:07    [W:1.999 / U:1.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site