[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1210335270.13978.252.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 14:14:30 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Cc: maxk@...lcomm.com, menage@...gle.com, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IRQ affinities (was: boot cgroup questions)
On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 07:03 -0500, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Peter wrote:
> > I see two use-cases:
> >
> > - Isolation
> > - NUMA node devices
>
> Ok ... so let me propose an entirely different solution.
>
> No doubt it has some terrible flaw, but I'll just have to
> await your replies to see what that is.
>
> How about we have:
>
> 1) Yet another text config file in /etc, this one containing
> lines having two fields:
> * a list of IRQs, and
> * a cpumask.
> This file would specify which CPUs should handle which IRQs.
>
> 2) A utility that can be run, after changing the above file,
> to poke the proper cpumask to each IRQ, as specified in
> the file.
>
> (Obligatory "simple" marketing claim: the above requires no
> kernel changes.)
>
> What am I missing?
Two points:
- we can't currently set irq affinities for non-existent (aka new) IRQs
- its a shame to duplicate the masks - most of this information would
also be used in the cpuset structure used to place the tasks.
--
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