Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: workqueue cpu affinity | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:44:00 +0200 |
| |
Sorry for being late,.. and I'm afraid most will have to wait a bit longer :-(
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 12:02 -0700, Max Krasnyansky wrote: > Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Please don't take this too personal - I'm glad you're working on this. > > I'm just trying to see what we can generalize.
> Oh, no worries, I'm not taking this personally, except maybe the "most your > ideas suck" part which got me a little bit ;-). I'm definitely all for making > it suitable for more general usage. > This is actually first constructive criticism (except for the "most of your > ideas suck" part :).
No, no, you understand me wrong (or I expressed myself wrong). Your ideas are good, its just the implementation / execution I have issues with.
Like with extending the isolation map, what didn't leave any room for hard-rt smp schedulers or multiple rt domains. Whereas the cpuset stuff does.
| |