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

[Peter Williams]

Matthew Dobson wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-10-05 at 19:08, Paul Jackson wrote:
>
> I don't know that these partitions would necessarily need their own
> scheduler, allocator and resource manager, or if we would just make the
> current scheduler, allocator and resource manager aware of these
> boundaries.  In either case, that is an implementation detail not to be
> agonized over now.

It's not so much whether they NEED their own scheduler, etc. as whether 
it should be possible for them to have their own scheduler, etc.  With a 
configurable scheduler (such as ZAPHOD) this could just be a matter of 
having separate configuration variables for each cpuset (e.g. if a 
cpuset has been created to contain as bunch of servers there's no need 
to try and provide good interactive response for its tasks (as none of 
them will be interactive) so the interactive response mechanism can be 
turned off in that cpuset leading to better server response and throughput).

Peter
--
Peter Williams                                   pwil3058@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
 -- Ambrose Bierce
-
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/