Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 3 Oct 2004 21:24:52 -0700 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] cpusets - big numa cpu and memory placement |
| |
Martin wrote: > Then when I fork off exclusive subset for CPUs 1&2, I have to push A & B > into it.
Tasks A & B must _not_ be considered members of that exclusive cpuset, even though it seems that A & B must be attended to by the sched_domain and memory_domain associated with that cpuset.
The workload managers expect to be able to list the tasks in a cpuset, so it can hibernate, migrate, kill-off, or wait for the finish of these tasks. I've been through this bug before - it was one that cost Hawkes a long week to debug - I was moving the per-cpu migration threads off their home CPU because I didn't have a clear way to distinguish tasks genuinely in a cpuset, from tasks that just happened to be indigenous to some of the same CPUs. My essential motivation for adapting a cpuset implementation that has a task struct pointer to a shared cpuset struct was to track exactly this relation - which tasks are in which cpuset.
No ... tasks A & B are not allowed in that new exclusive cpuset.
-- 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/
| |