* Peter Zijlstra [2013-07-05 12:16:54]:
> On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 11:32:27PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > Here is an approach to look at numa balanced scheduling from a non numa
> > fault
> > angle. This approach uses process weights instead of faults as a basis to
> > move or bring
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 11:32:27PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> Here is an approach to look at numa balanced scheduling from a non numa fault
> angle. This approach uses process weights instead of faults as a basis to
> move or bring tasks together.
That doesn't make any sense. how would
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 11:32:27PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
Here is an approach to look at numa balanced scheduling from a non numa fault
angle. This approach uses process weights instead of faults as a basis to
move or bring tasks together.
That doesn't make any sense. how would
* Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org [2013-07-05 12:16:54]:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 11:32:27PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
Here is an approach to look at numa balanced scheduling from a non numa
fault
angle. This approach uses process weights instead of faults as a basis to
move or
Here is an approach to look at numa balanced scheduling from a non numa fault
angle. This approach uses process weights instead of faults as a basis to
move or bring tasks together.
Here are the advantages of this approach.
1. Provides excellent consolidation of tasks.
- I have verified
Here is an approach to look at numa balanced scheduling from a non numa fault
angle. This approach uses process weights instead of faults as a basis to
move or bring tasks together.
Here are the advantages of this approach.
1. Provides excellent consolidation of tasks.
- I have verified
6 matches
Mail list logo
