Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964839AbWH1Mby (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2006 08:31:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964847AbWH1Mby (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2006 08:31:54 -0400 Received: from smtp104.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.214]:15226 "HELO smtp104.mail.mud.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S964839AbWH1Mbx (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Aug 2006 08:31:53 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=FPINSvbAJR/ITjasMKxmnRGYJiNHWF2pdhExZNfM2JasH8Wjch3QSJYtjOG9zB89HRO/ZsIN+wV4RyVPqKAjp993RHJHciy4huenvPgsO/tKEVP41/pJK1SDHcDvRVWVrAf29sMf/eXliFfJl4Hrmn8ukFjbcMX1DoS9vFoVHH4= ; Message-ID: <44F2E216.7090300@yahoo.com.au> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:31:18 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051007 Debian/1.7.12-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vatsa@in.ibm.com CC: Kirill Korotaev , Ingo Molnar , Sam Vilain , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kirill Korotaev , Mike Galbraith , Balbir Singh , sekharan@us.ibm.com, Andrew Morton , nagar@watson.ibm.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] CPU controller V1 - split runqueue References: <20060820174015.GA13917@in.ibm.com> <20060820174147.GB13917@in.ibm.com> <44EEEF28.4080707@sw.ru> <20060828033331.GA25119@in.ibm.com> <44F2A62C.9090609@sw.ru> <20060828110330.GA30090@in.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20060828110330.GA30090@in.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1261 Lines: 29 Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote: > On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 12:15:40PM +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote: >>When I talked with Nick Piggin on summit he was quite optimistic >>with such an approach. And again, this invasiveness is very simple >>so I do not forsee much objections. > > > Ingo/Nick, what do you think? If we decide that is a usefull thing to > try, I can see how these mechanisms will be usefull for general SMP > systems too (w/o depending on resource management). I still haven't had much time to look at the implementation, but this design seems cleanest I've considered, IMO. Of course I would really hope we don't need any special casing in the SMP balancing (which may be the tricky part). However hopefully if things don't work well in that department, they can be made to by improving the core code to be more general rather than special casing. Do you have a better (/another) idea for the design? -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - 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/