[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180918133805.GN24106@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:38:05 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Jan H. Schönherr <jschoenh@...zon.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Subject: Re: Task group cleanups and optimizations (was: Re: [RFC 00/60]
Coscheduling for Linux)
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 03:22:13PM +0200, Jan H. Schönherr wrote:
> On 09/17/2018 11:48 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 10:48:20AM +0200, Jan H. Schönherr wrote:
> >> On 09/14/2018 06:25 PM, Jan H. Schönherr wrote:
> >
> >>> b) ability to move CFS RQs between CPUs: someone changed the affinity of
> >>> a cpuset? No problem, just attach the runqueue with all the tasks elsewhere.
> >>> No need to touch each and every task.
> >
> > Can't do that, tasks might have individual constraints that are tighter
> > than the cpuset.
>
> AFAIK, changing the affinity of a cpuset overwrites the individual affinities of tasks
> within them. Thus, it shouldn't be an issue.
No, it only shrinks the set. Also nothing stops you calling
sched_setaffinity() once you're inside the cpuset. The only contraint is
that your mask is a subset of the cpuset mask.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists