[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141110155009.GY10501@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 16:50:09 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc: Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, "Auld, Will" <will.auld@...el.com>,
Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Fleming, Matt" <matt.fleming@...el.com>, h.peter.anvin@...el.com
Subject: Re: Cache Allocation Technology Design
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 05:03:23PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Nov, at 02:17:14PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > I don't like extending cpusets further. Its already a weird and too big
> > controller.
> >
> > What is wrong with having a specific CQM controller and using it
> > together with cpusets where desired?
>
> The specific problem that conflating cpusets and the CAT controller is
> trying to solve is that on some platforms the CLOS ID doesn't move with
> data that travels up the cache hierarchy, i.e. we lose the CLOS ID when
> data moves from LLC to L2.
>
> I think the idea with pinning CLOS IDs to a specific cpu and any tasks
> that are using that ID is that it works around this problem out of the
> box, rather than requiring sysadmins to configure things.
So either the user needs to set that mode _and_ set cpu masks, or the
user needs to use cpusets and set masks, same difference to me.
--
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