[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC] ioctl based CAT interface
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:18:42AM -0500, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> Peter, I'm giving a serious try on the cgroups patches and would be
> glad to be enlightened if I'm missing something. But I don't see how
> what you're proposing would solve the problem.
> My understanding of CAT is that if I want to reserve 80% of the cache
> in socket-1 to $thread-A I also have to:
> 1. Create another mask reserving 20% of the cache in socket-1
> 2. Assign that mask to all other threads that may run in socket-1
> If I'm right about this, then when a task with 20% reservation migrates
> to socket-2 it will only access 20% of the cache there even though there
> should be no restrictions in socket-2's cache.

Uh what? Task-A was bound to socket-1, it will never get to socket-2.

Clearly I'm not getting these examples you're throwing around.

Also, I explicitly do not want tasks that can migrate between sockets to
have different performance profiles across those sockets.

 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-16 17:41    [W:0.050 / U:39.372 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site