On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 13:12 +0900, Magnus Damm wrote:
> On 9/9/05, KUROSAWA Takahiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 05:02:32 -0700
> > Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > One of my passions is to avoid special cases across API boundaries.
> > >
> > > I am proposing that
Takahashi-san wrote:
> What do you think if you make cpusets for sched domain be able to
> have their siblings, which have the same attribute and share
> their resources between them.
I do not understand this question. I guess "cpusets for sched
domains" means "cpusets whose 'cpu_exclusive' attri
Hi,
> magnus wrote:
> > Maybe it is possible to have an hierarchical model and keep the
> > framework simple and easy to understand while providing guarantees,
>
> Dinakar's patches to use cpu_exclusive cpusets to define dynamic
> sched domains accomplish something like this.
>
> What scheduler
Magnus wrote:
> Non-overlapping subsets of cpu or memory nodes basically mean that
> children of a cpuset only clear bits in the bitmap, never sets them.
X is a subset of Y if every element of X is also in Y.
My phrase "a subset of the CPUs" really just meant "some set of CPUs"
on the system. A
On 9/9/05, Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> magnus wrote:
> > Maybe it is possible to have an hierarchical model and keep the
> > framework simple and easy to understand while providing guarantees,
>
> Dinakar's patches to use cpu_exclusive cpusets to define dynamic
> sched domains accomp
magnus wrote:
> Maybe it is possible to have an hierarchical model and keep the
> framework simple and easy to understand while providing guarantees,
Dinakar's patches to use cpu_exclusive cpusets to define dynamic
sched domains accomplish something like this.
What scheduler domains and resource
On 9/9/05, KUROSAWA Takahiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 05:02:32 -0700
> Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > One of my passions is to avoid special cases across API boundaries.
> >
> > I am proposing that you don't do subcpusets like this.
> >
> > Consider the following
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 05:02:32 -0700
Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> These subcpusets, if I understand correctly, are a bit different
> from ordinary cpusets. For instance, it seems one cannot make child
> cpusets of them, and one cannot change most of their properties,
> such as cpus, mem
On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 18:44 +0530, Dinakar Guniguntala wrote:
> Interesting implementation of resource controls. Cross posting this
I second this :)
Browsed a little through the docs/patches... seems to fit very well into
a resource management solution (hint CKRM :) than CPUSET (resource
isolati
Dinakar wrote:
> Cross posting this to ckrm-tech as well.
Good idea - thanks.
Hopefully Takahiro-san and the CKRM folks can reach an understanding
on how their two proposals relate.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Dipankar wrote:
> If what subcpusets is doing is slicing cpusets resources, then wouldn't
> it be more intusive to call them slice0, slice1 etc. under the
> respective cpuset ?
If we continue with Takahiro-san's design, then I agree that the name
'subcpusets' doesn't have quite the right connotat
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 06:44:27PM +0530, Dinakar Guniguntala wrote:
>
>
> > On the other hand, Dinakar had more work to do than you might, because
> > he needed a complete covering (so had to round up cpus in non exclusive
> > cpusets to form more covering elements). From what I can tell, you
>
Interesting implementation of resource controls. Cross posting this
to ckrm-tech as well. I am sure CKRM folks have something to say...
Any thoughts about how you want to add more resource control features
on top of/in addition to this setup. (Such as memory etc)
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 12:23:
Takahiro-san wrote, in reply to Paul:
> > 2) Would a structure similar to Dinakar's patches to connect
> > cpusets and dynamic sched domains (posted to linux-mm)
> > work here as well?
>
> Yes, subcpusets could work with the dynamic sched domains.
Ah - I see I was quite unclear about wha
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 00:23:23 -0700
Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've just started reading this - it seems well presented and I think
> you have put much effort into it. Thank-you for posting it.
Thank you for reading my patches!
> I have not yet taken the time to understand it prope
[ Adding Dinakar to explicit cc list, since I mention his work.
Hopefully he can correct any mispresentations of his work I
might have presented.- pj ]
I've just started reading this - it seems well presented and I think
you have put much effort into it. Thank-you for posting it.
I have
The following patchset adds resource control functionality to the
CPUSETS code by subdividing a cpuset into smaller pieces (SUBCPUSETS).
It is made up from two parts, one for the resource control framework
and another for the specific resource controller. Resource controllers
can be added by usi
17 matches
Mail list logo
