[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20061019011546.39c7a8df.pj@sgi.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 01:15:46 -0700
From: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc: suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, dino@...ibm.com, menage@...gle.com,
Simon.Derr@...l.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mbligh@...gle.com, rohitseth@...gle.com, dipankar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Cpuset: explicit dynamic sched domain control flags
> But please don't let *users* try to deal with it.
Agreed - that's why I am about to send a patch that removes
the sched domain side affects of the cpu_exclusive flag.
Well, not entirely agreed. User space code does need
to be able to specify some cpus as isolated from scheduler
balancing. I will send a second patch to support that.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists