[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] scheduler: Dynamic sched_domains
    On Wednesday, October 6, 2004 7:13 pm, Nick Piggin wrote:
    > Hmm, what was my word for them... yeah, disjoint. We can do that now,
    > see isolcpus= for a subset of the functionality you want (doing larger
    > exclusive sets would probably just require we run the setup code once
    > for each exclusive set we want to build).

    Yeah, and unfortunately since I added the code for overlapping domains w/o
    adding a top level domain at the same time, we have disjoint domains by
    default on large systems.

    > Also, how will you do overlapping domains that SGI want to do (see
    > arch/ia64/kernel/domain.c in -mm kernels)?
    > node2 wants to balance between node0, node1, itself, node3, node4.
    > node4 wants to balance between node2, node3, itself, node5, node6.
    > etc.
    > I think your lists will get tangled, no?

    Yeah, but overlapping domains aren't a requirement. In fact, making the
    scheduling domains dynamically configurable is probably a *much* better
    route, since I doubt that some default overlap setup will be optimal for many
    workloads (that doesn't mean we shouldn't have good defaults though). Being
    able to configure the rebalance and tick rates of the various domains would
    also be a good thing (the defaults could be keyed off of the number of CPUs
    and/or nodes in the domain).

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.023 / U:1.400 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site