Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:28:06 -0700
From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
To: dino@in.ibm.com
Cc: suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, menage@google.com, Simon.Derr@bull.net,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mbligh@google.com, rohitseth@google.com,
       dipankar@in.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Cpuset: explicit dynamic sched domain control flags
Message-Id: <20061018232806.a6145f0f.pj@sgi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20061018174925.GB7885@in.ibm.com>
References: <20061016230351.19049.29855.sendpatchset@jackhammer.engr.sgi.com>
	<20061018174925.GB7885@in.ibm.com>
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: 927
Lines: 26

Dinakar wrote:
> IMO this change is counter intuitive and pointless

If we intend to make the cpuset to sched_domain interaction
functional, something like this was needed.

However I am now leaning toward thinking that the entire
effort to manipulate sched_domain definitions by cpusets
(the cpu_exclusive flag) has been counter intuitive, and
is borked.

So I will be sending out patches to remove it, and replace
with a trivial mechanism to allow for runtime manipulation
of the cpu_isolated_map.

Coming soon ...

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