[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 Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 02:04:38PM -0500, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> I guess that what Peter is saying is that we don't want tasks
> attached to a reservation landing on a CPU where the reservation
> might be different or not existent at all.


> This way, the ATTACH_RESERVATION command would fail if any
> of the CPUs in the cpumask are not part of the reservation.
> And then our code would have to be notified any time the process'
> affinity mask is changed (we either fail the affinity change
> or detach the process automatically from the reservation). Does
> this sound like a good solution?

No. We're not going to have random drivers muck about with affinity
masks, and most certainly not some manky ioctl.

 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-16 10:21    [W:0.064 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site