lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] Customize sched domain via cpuset
From
Date
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 17:41 +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 20:27 +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
> >> The implementation is here.
> >>
> >> - Add 2 new cpuset files:
> >> sched_wake_idle_far
> >> sched_balance_newidle_far
> >>
> >> - Modify partition_sched_domains() and build_sched_domains()
> >> to take flags parameter passed from cpuset.
> >>
> >> - Fill newidle_idx for node domains which currently unused but
> >> might be required for sched_balance_newidle_far.
> >
> > Just to be clear; the same effect can be had by poking into:
> >
> > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_domain/$cpu/$domain/flags
> >
> > but this interface you now propose gives a more stable interface in that
> > you'd have to re-do your setting after every cpuset change (admittedly
> > those are rare, but I see how it could be a nuisance).
>
> And the sysctl entry "sched_domain" is not available unless SCHED_DEBUG.
>
> So it is common sense that this sysctl is not open to public yet,
> and that the expected users are scheduler developers, Ingo and friends.

Ah, right, totally forgot about that :-)

> > Or do you actually add something that wasn't available through the
> > initial domain interface?
>
> At this time I have no idea, but it would be possible if there are
> something unreasonable on global system but acceptable on a part.
>
> In other words, we can invent other sched_* families which has special
> effect that "default scheduler" never have.

I was asking about this patch in specific, and the answer seems to be:
no, we don't add anything that wasn't available.

And yes, I see the possiblilties to extend this :-)



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-02 10:47    [W:1.298 / U:0.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site