lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Reverting per-cpuset "system" (IRQ affinity) patch

* Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com> wrote:

> > No problem, I've been meaning to redo this whole series but somehow
> > stuff got in the way and I never got around to it :-/
>
> I'm actually totally surprised that it got in. Ingo applied Peter's
> initial patch to his sched-devel tree but then ignored follow up
> patches with fixes and stuff from me (I'm assuming that was because we
> started discussion alternative options).

yes, there's been a lot of back and forth.

Paul/Peter/Max, what's the current agreed-upon approach to merge these
physical resource isolation features into cpusets intelligently while
still keeping the whole thing as usable and practical to down-to-earth
sysadmins as possible? That is the issue that is blocking this whole
topic from progressing.

> Anyway, my vote goes for reverting these series.

none of this is upstream yet (nor is any of this even near to being
ready for upstream), so there's nothing to revert.

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-05-09 12:25    [W:0.414 / U:0.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site