lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.137 / U:0.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site