Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Feb 2005 22:16:10 -0800 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [ckrm-tech] Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] cpusets - big numa cpu and memory placement |
| |
I agree with 97% of what you write, Chandra.
> one more level of indirection(instead of task->cpuset->cpus_allowed > it will be task->taskclass->res[CPUSET]->cpus_allowed).
No -- two more levels of indirection (task->cpus_allowed becomes task->taskclass->res[CPUSET]->cpus_allowed).
> But, for your purposes or our discussions one would need only 3 modules > of the above (core, rcfs and taskclass).
Ok. That was not obvious to me until now. If there is a section in your documentation that explains this, and addresses the needs and motivations of someone trying to reuse portions of CKRM in such a manner, I missed it. Whatever ...
In any case, on the issue that matters to me right now, we agree:
> It won't be a happy, productive marriage.
Good. Thanks. Good luck to you.
> PS to everyone else: Wow, you have lot of patience :)
For sure.
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373, 1.925.600.0401 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |