Hello,
On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 04:08:22PM -0800, Brian Welty wrote:
> I was more interested in hearing your thoughts on whether you like
> the approach to have a set of controls that are consistent with
> some subset of the existing CPU/MEM ones. Any feedback on this?
> Didn't really mean to
On 11/4/2019 4:15 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:08:47PM -0500, Brian Welty wrote:
>> + gpuset.units
>> + gpuset.units.effective
>> + gpuset.units.partition
>> +
>> + gpuset.mems
>> + gpuset.mems.effective
>> + gpuset.mems.partition
>> +
>> + sched.max
>> + sched.stats
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 05:08:47PM -0500, Brian Welty wrote:
> + gpuset.units
> + gpuset.units.effective
> + gpuset.units.partition
> +
> + gpuset.mems
> + gpuset.mems.effective
> + gpuset.mems.partition
> +
> + sched.max
> + sched.stats
> + sched.weight
> + sched.weight.nice
> +
> +
Here is one proposal for a set of interface files to be implemented in
in a new DRM controller. This is an alternate set of interface files
than in the current v4 of DRM controller [1]. As there was not a clear
consensus on the interface files and associated controls, it seems worth
again
