[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1307112469.2353.3402.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 16:47:49 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Jesse Larrew <jlarrew@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
nfont@...tin.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [BUG] rebuild_sched_domains considered dangerous
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 11:17 -0500, Jesse Larrew wrote:
> > I would really like to see both patch-sets together. Also, I'm not
> at
> > all convinced its a sane thing to do. Pretty much all NUMA aware
> > software I know of assumes that CPU<->NODE relations are static,
> > breaking that in kernel renders all existing software broken.
> >
>
> I suspect that's true. Then again, shouldn't it be the capabilities of
> the hardware that dictates what the software does, rather than the
> other way around?
Wish that were true, we wouldn't be all constrained by all this legacy
software.. ;-)
Anyway, there's plenty of CPU<->NODE assumptions in the kernel as well,
fixing those will be 'interesting' at best, as for userspace, since its
a user-driven tool revamping the topology the user gets to keep the
pieces when he runs that while some NUMA aware proglet is running.
--
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