lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Lse-tech] Re: [PATCH] O(1) scheduler set_cpus_allowed for non-current tasks
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
>
> If these are processes that are bound to the CPU to be shut down,
> wouldn't it make sense to fail the CPU shut down operation ? If you
> are giving enough control to the user to make CPU affinity decisions,
> they better know how to cleanup before shutting down a CPU.

I can imagine some users (applications) wanting to insist on
staying on a particular CPU (Pike's Peak or Bust), and some
content to be migrated automatically, and some wanting to
receive and act on requests to migrate.

One of these policies might be default, with others as options.

Some CPU shut down operations _can't_ fail ... if they are motivated
say by hardware about to fail.

--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373

-
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: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.091 / U:24.964 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site