Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 12:26:44 -0500
From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
To: Mark Hounschell <dmarkh@cfl.rr.com>
Cc: nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, ioe-lkml@rameria.de,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@kolivas.org, dfults@sgi.com,
       devik@cdi.cz, sivanich@sgi.com, dino@in.ibm.com,
       emmanuel.pacaud@univ-poitiers.fr, deweerdt@free.fr, mingo@elte.hu,
       colpatch@us.ibm.com, maxk@qualcomm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
       oleg@tv-sign.ru, paulmck@us.ibm.com, menage@google.com,
       rddunlap@osdl.org, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may
 have realtime uses)
Message-Id: <20080604122644.cd73bfb9.pj@sgi.com>
In-Reply-To: <48466745.5050802@cfl.rr.com>
References: <20080601213019.14ea8ef8.pj@sgi.com>
	<200806030035.58387.ioe-lkml@rameria.de>
	<1212446707.6269.26.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
	<200806031603.40731.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
	<48466745.5050802@cfl.rr.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: 831
Lines: 19

Mark wrote:
> What is an abonination, is that cpusets are equired for this type of 
> isolation to begin with, even on a 2 processor machine.

Just to be sure I'm following you here, you stating that you
want to be able to manipulate the isolated cpu map at runtime,
not just with the boot option isolcpus, right?  Where this
isolated cpu map works just fine even on systems which do
not have cpusets configured, right?

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.940.382.4214
--
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/