Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1946406AbWJSTu0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:50:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1946407AbWJSTu0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:50:26 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.45.12]:37841 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1946406AbWJSTuZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:50:25 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; 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=df4Gw0ZLBoEO4rKZhSFhg2qInxza4LbzSL4tFV0Jq8DaYZR83mFM8AuqyoeYR0adj gn6UVW+AFUhrG2QyAoGIw== Message-ID: <4537D6E8.8020501@google.com> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:50:00 -0700 From: Martin Bligh User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051011) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Piggin CC: Paul Jackson , akpm@osdl.org, menage@google.com, Simon.Derr@bull.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dino@in.ibm.com, rohitseth@google.com, holt@sgi.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com Subject: Re: [RFC] cpuset: remove sched domain hooks from cpusets References: <20061019092358.17547.51425.sendpatchset@sam.engr.sgi.com> <4537527B.5050401@yahoo.com.au> <20061019120358.6d302ae9.pj@sgi.com> <4537D056.9080108@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <4537D056.9080108@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 959 Lines: 21 > I don't know of anyone else using cpusets, but I'd be interested to know. We (Google) are planning to use it to do some partitioning, albeit on much smaller machines. I'd really like to NOT use cpus_allowed from previous experience - if we can get it to to partition using separated sched domains, that would be much better. From my dim recollections of previous discussions when cpusets was added in the first place, we asked for exactly the same thing then. I think some of the problem came from the fact that "exclusive" to cpusets doesn't actually mean exclusive at all, and they're shared in some fashion. Perhaps that issue is cleared up now? /me crosses all fingers and toes and prays really hard. M. - 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/