P.S. (I've not studied the hotplug code) When a cpu is hot-unplugged,
are it's runqueues and whatnot deallocated? (i should just go look, but
by the time i get around to it, some nice person may have already put an
answer in my mailbox;)
-Mike
P.S.#2: not only bitmap are zeroed, task
On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 17:19 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Monday 26 March 2007 15:00, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 11:00 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > > This is just for testing at the moment! The reason is the size of this
> > > patch.
> >
> > (no testing done yet, but I have
On Monday 26 March 2007 15:00, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 11:00 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> > This is just for testing at the moment! The reason is the size of this
> > patch.
>
> (no testing done yet, but I have a couple comments)
>
> > In the interest of evolution, I've taken
On Monday 26 March 2007 15:00, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 11:00 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
This is just for testing at the moment! The reason is the size of this
patch.
(no testing done yet, but I have a couple comments)
In the interest of evolution, I've taken the RSDL
On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 17:19 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
On Monday 26 March 2007 15:00, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 11:00 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
This is just for testing at the moment! The reason is the size of this
patch.
(no testing done yet, but I have a couple
P.S. (I've not studied the hotplug code) When a cpu is hot-unplugged,
are it's runqueues and whatnot deallocated? (i should just go look, but
by the time i get around to it, some nice person may have already put an
answer in my mailbox;)
-Mike
P.S.#2: not only bitmap are zeroed, task
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The patches available also include a rollup of sched: accurate user
> > accounting as this code touches the same area and it is most
> > convenient to include them together.
>
> as i mentioned it before, please keep this one separate, as we want to
* Con Kolivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The patches available also include a rollup of sched: accurate user
> accounting as this code touches the same area and it is most
> convenient to include them together.
as i mentioned it before, please keep this one separate, as we want to
apply it
On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 11:00 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> This is just for testing at the moment! The reason is the size of this patch.
(no testing done yet, but I have a couple comments)
> In the interest of evolution, I've taken the RSDL cpu scheduler and increased
> the resolution of the task
This is just for testing at the moment! The reason is the size of this patch.
In the interest of evolution, I've taken the RSDL cpu scheduler and increased
the resolution of the task timekeeping to nanosecond resolution. This removes
the need for the runqueue rotation component entirely out of
This is just for testing at the moment! The reason is the size of this patch.
In the interest of evolution, I've taken the RSDL cpu scheduler and increased
the resolution of the task timekeeping to nanosecond resolution. This removes
the need for the runqueue rotation component entirely out of
On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 11:00 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
This is just for testing at the moment! The reason is the size of this patch.
(no testing done yet, but I have a couple comments)
In the interest of evolution, I've taken the RSDL cpu scheduler and increased
the resolution of the task
* Con Kolivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The patches available also include a rollup of sched: accurate user
accounting as this code touches the same area and it is most
convenient to include them together.
as i mentioned it before, please keep this one separate, as we want to
apply it
* Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The patches available also include a rollup of sched: accurate user
accounting as this code touches the same area and it is most
convenient to include them together.
as i mentioned it before, please keep this one separate, as we want to
apply
14 matches
Mail list logo
