Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 1 Jun 2008 21:35:33 -0500 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched: Give cpusets exclusive control over sched domains (ie remove cpu_isolated_map) |
| |
Max K wrote: > Would you be ok with a patch that exposes (via sysctl > for example) scheduler balancer mask when cpusets are disabled ?
I wasn't looking for a variant implementation. Unless this variant serves some critical purpose that isolcpus can't provide, I would be against it. I'm trying to minimize API changes to kernel users.
I am trying to discuss the reasons for or against removing isolcpus.
I just started a separate lkml thread, with a wider audience, to address this question:
Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may have realtime uses)
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.940.382.4214
| |