[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20181025182317.GE18466@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 23:53:17 +0530
From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Yi Wang <wang.yi59@....com.cn>, zhong.weidong@....com.cn,
Yi Liu <liu.yi24@....com.cn>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/core: Don't mix isolcpus and housekeeping CPUs
>
> You can create multiple partitions with cpusets but still have an
> unbound task in the root cgroup. That would suffer the exact same
> problems.
>
I probably don't understand this. Even if the child cgroups has
cpu_exclusive or sched_load_balance reset, the tasks in root cgroup has
access to all cpus in system. Right?
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
Powered by blists - more mailing lists