> That makes no sense to me whatsoever, I'm afraid. Why if they were allowed
> "to steal a few cycles" are they so fervently banned from being in there?
One substantial advantage of cpusets (as in the kernel patch in *-mm's
tree), over variations that "just poke the affinity masks from user
space" is the task->cpuset pointer. This tracks to what cpuset a task
is attached. The fork and exit code duplicates and nukes this pointer,
managing the cpuset reference counter.
It matters to batch schedulers and the like which cpuset a task is in,
and which tasks are in a cpuset, when it comes time to do things like
suspend or migrate the tasks currently in a cpuset.
Just because it's ok to share a little compute time in a cpuset doesn't
mean you don't care to know who is in it.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1.650.933.1373
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
_______________________________________________
ckrm-tech mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
