On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 12:55:24PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote: > On 10/12/2015 12:53 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Is it worth starting to think about grouping things under the > "task isolation" model somehow? "task_isolation_cpus=1-31" > or some such for this, and then that just sets up the nohz_full > and isolcpus options under the hood?
Yeah if I could do it again, I would have rather created something like cpu_isolation= (which name would conflict with isolcpus though) instead of nohz_full=, because nohz_full= is really just a subset of what people want. But yeah if you guys want to create a new parameter that gathers nohz and isolcpus I think we can. task_isolation is really just about tasks so it should be another name. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
