Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753441AbeAQOvR (ORCPT + 1 other); Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:51:17 -0500 Received: from resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.35]:59060 "EHLO resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753142AbeAQOvQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:51:16 -0500 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 08:51:13 -0600 (CST) From: Christopher Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@nuc-kabylake To: Mike Galbraith cc: Frederic Weisbecker , Luiz Capitulino , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Peter Zijlstra , Chris Metcalf , Thomas Gleixner , "Paul E . McKenney" , Wanpeng Li , Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] isolation: 1Hz residual tick offloading v3 In-Reply-To: <1516125498.6599.23.camel@gmx.de> Message-ID: References: <1515039937-367-1-git-send-email-frederic@kernel.org> <20180112141813.32dcc84d@redhat.com> <20180116154055.GA27042@lerouge> <1516125498.6599.23.camel@gmx.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; BOUNDARY="8323329-2143160757-1516200673=:12151" X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfPlNgiz7YjXJIk8/AxmE+aWAhN1uVoqi58KPUeTDvZcqCc2yVppCcnRR7HxagzJMROrxnzCPHu8eYQvTEVzrFDkjCGFQ2y5ora/7lLyVrAPkPuMasgeC 0u9TX5KWy1klpNkIcudb5CnMZJ9CQYFcrfEsK3zuJp1OO3zPliAZ4rKMzDggqy4tVaU7Eu2r3XiEG7lA4snmNHU0O8J9l9rAMyZdgfYgNVYpVw3Ri4gc75s0 lgw6hy9y/dcQcYMGdl73LYR+ddj/cyQvn+gEtnk1E0ZBBbqfyp0X92cMU/5pRfT3K/bKVzqoY2pQVasbjs+keNoH6e9dtLTmsEvOakh8es+7wygF1MllsULB vH7mNZtlIafmVZcaZC5ObdRSQOqtteXgFKOoa44MBXAS2SauJ6NL4b/UWaYuppp2gi3blaeiwjDFcYvBmjoMi9TosTAJw6/+ZHmMOwgaxwT4OyiWcfC9P4tk kuJnvXFsV5UdP+Xy Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323329-2143160757-1516200673=:12151 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Tue, 16 Jan 2018, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > I tried to remove isolcpus or at least change the way it works so that its > > effects are reversible (ie: affine the init task instead of isolating domains) > > but that got nacked due to the behaviour's expectations for userspace. > > So we paint ourselves into a static corner forever more, despite every > bit of this being all about "properties of sets of cpus", ie precisely > what cpusets was born to do. ?That's sad, dynamic wasn't that far away. cpusets was born in order to isolate applications to sets of processors. The properties of sets of cpus was not on the horizon when SGI started this. We have sets of cpus associated with affinity masks in the form of bitmaps etc etc which is much more lightweight than having slug around the cgroup overhead everywhere. A simple bitmask is much better if you have to control detailed system behavior for each core and are planning each processes role because you need to make full use of the harware resources available. --8323329-2143160757-1516200673=:12151--