Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] cpusets - big numa cpu and memory placement

[Paul Jackson]

Peter wrote:
> 
> Of course, this [kernel compile option] makes gradual movement
> from one model to the other difficult to say the least.

To say the least.

It might be possible to continue to support current affinity calls
(setaffinity/mbind/mempolicy) even while removing the duplication of
affinity masks between tasks and cpusets.

If each call to set a tasks affinity resulted in moving that task into
its very own cpuset (unless it was already the only user of its cpuset),
and if the calls to load and store task->{cpus,mems}_allowed in the
implementation of these affinity sys calls were changed to load and
store those affinity masks in the tasks cpuset instead.

I'm just brainstorming here ... this scheme could easily have some
fatal flaw that I'm missing at the moment.

-- 
                          I won't rest till it's the best ...
                          Programmer, Linux Scalability
                          Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> 1.650.933.1373
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/