[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200710030553.27822.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 05:53:27 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, menage@...gle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dino@...ibm.com, cpw@....com,
mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuset and sched domains: sched_load_balance flag
On Wednesday 03 October 2007 22:14, Paul Jackson wrote:
> > These are what I'm worried about, and things like kswapd, pdflush,
> > could definitely use a huge amount of CPU.
> >
> > If you are interested in hard partitioning the system, you most
> > definitely want these things to be balanced across the non-isolated
> > CPUs.
>
> But these guys are pinned anyway (or else they would already be moved
> into a smaller load balanced cpuset), so why waste time load balancing
> what can't move?
They're not pinned (kswapds are pinned to a node, but still). pdflush
is not pinned at all and can be dynamically created and destroyed. Ditto
for kjournald, as well as many others.
Basically: it doesn't feel like a satisfactory solution to brush these under
the carpet.
> And on some of the systems I care about, we don't want to load balance
> these guys; rather we go to great lengths to see that they don't run at
> all when we don't want them to.
Most smaller realtime partitioned systems will want to, I'd expect.
-
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