lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    DateMon, 3 Mar 2008 21:26:42 -0800
    From"Paul Menage" <>
    SubjectRe: [RFC/PATCH] cpuset: cpuset irq affinities
    On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 10:52 AM, Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> wrote:
    > Paul M wrote:
    >  > It ... would allow memory and CPU assignments to be controlled
    >  > independently.
    >
    >  Could you motivate this suggestion -- who needs it, or why
    >  would is it needed?
    
    My impression was that Peter wanted to be able to control the
    assignments of CPUs to IRQs in a way that could result in overlapping.
    One of the arguments that you posted against his proposal was that
    this would break due to the memory overlap requirements of
    mem_exclusive cpusets. So this appeared to be a case where the fact
    that memory and cpu masks are combined in the same cgroups subsystem
    is a drawback. (But maybe I'm misunderstanding the discussion).
    
    I'm sure if cpusets were being developed today on top of cgroups,
    rather than being its inspiration, there would be no good reason to
    have the memory mask assignment and the cpu mask assignment be part of
    the same subsystem - they're only together now because there was no
    general grouping mechanism in the kernel when cpusets was written.
    
    Paul
    
    
    
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-03-04 06:29    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2008