Re: Using cpusets for configuration/isolation [Was Re: RT sched:cpupri_vec lock contention with def_root_domain and no load balance]

[Ingo Molnar]

* Max Krasnyansky <maxk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Max Krasnyansky <maxk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >> What you described is almost exactly what I did in my original 
> >> cpu isolation patch, which did get NAKed :). Basically I used 
> >> global cpu_isolated_map and exposed 'isolated' bit, etc.
> > 
> > Please extend cpusets according to the plan outlined by PeterZ a 
> > few months ago - that's the right place to do partitioning.
> 
> Already did. It's all in mainline. The part you quoted was just 
> pointing out that the original approach was not correct.

Yeah, we have bits of it (i merged them, and i still remember them ;-) 
- but we still dont have the "system set" concept suggested by Peter 
though. We could go further and make it really easy to partition all 
scheduling and irq aspects of the system via cpusets.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/