[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200211114350.GJ14914@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 12:43:50 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: 王贇 <yun.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"open list:SCHEDULER" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] why can't dynamic isolation just like the static way
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 04:17:34PM +0800, 王贇 wrote:
> Hi, folks
>
> We are dealing with isolcpus these days and try to do the isolation
> dynamically.
>
> The kernel doc lead us into the cpuset.sched_load_balance, it's fine
> to achieve the dynamic isolation with it, however we got problem with
> the systemd stuff.
Then don't use systemd :-) Also, if systemd is the problem, why are you
bugging us?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists