Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 15:49:58 -0700
From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
To: Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>
Cc: Simon.Derr@bull.net, colpatch@us.ibm.com, mbligh@aracnet.com,
       frankeh@watson.ibm.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@osdl.org,
       ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, efocht@hpce.nec.com,
       lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, hch@infradead.org, steiner@sgi.com,
       jbarnes@sgi.com, sylvain.jeaugey@bull.net, djh@sgi.com,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@suse.de, sivanich@sgi.com
Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] cpusets - big numa cpu and memory placement
Message-Id: <20041006154958.18d9d917.pj@sgi.com>
In-Reply-To: <416469D5.9050202@bigpond.net.au>
References: <20040805100901.3740.99823.84118@sam.engr.sgi.com>
	<20040805190500.3c8fb361.pj@sgi.com>
	<247790000.1091762644@[10.10.2.4]>
	<200408061730.06175.efocht@hpce.nec.com>
	<20040806231013.2b6c44df.pj@sgi.com>
	<411685D6.5040405@watson.ibm.com>
	<20041001164118.45b75e17.akpm@osdl.org>
	<20041001230644.39b551af.pj@sgi.com>
	<20041002145521.GA8868@in.ibm.com>
	<415ED3E3.6050008@watson.ibm.com>
	<415F37F9.6060002@bigpond.net.au>
	<821020000.1096814205@[10.10.2.4]>
	<20041003083936.7c844ec3.pj@sgi.com>
	<834330000.1096847619@[10.10.2.4]>
	<1097014749.4065.48.camel@arrakis>
	<20041005194702.0644070b.pj@sgi.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0410061114470.19964@openx3.frec.bull.fr>
	<416469D5.9050202@bigpond.net.au>
Organization: SGI
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 978
Lines: 23

Peter protests:
> I think that this is becoming overly complicated.

My brainstorming ways to accomodate the isolation that the scheduler,
allocator and resource manager domains require is getting ahead of
itself.

First I need to hear from the CKRM folks what degree of isolation they
really need, the essential minimum, and how they intend to accomodate
not just cpusets, but also the other placement API's sched_setaffinity,
mbind and set_mempolicy, as well as the per-cpu kernel threads.

Then it makes sense to revisit the implementation.

-- 
                          I won't rest till it's the best ...
                          Programmer, Linux Scalability
                          Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373
-
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/