lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: workqueue cpu affinity
From
Date
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.





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-12 20:49    [W:0.068 / U:1.968 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site