Re: [RFC] cpuset: remove sched domain hooks from cpusets

[Nick Piggin]

Martin Bligh wrote:
> > I don't know of anyone else using cpusets, but I'd be interested to know.
>
>
> We (Google) are planning to use it to do some partitioning, albeit on
> much smaller machines. I'd really like to NOT use cpus_allowed from
> previous experience - if we can get it to to partition using separated
> sched domains, that would be much better.
>
>  From my dim recollections of previous discussions when cpusets was
> added in the first place, we asked for exactly the same thing then.
> I think some of the problem came from the fact that "exclusive"
> to cpusets doesn't actually mean exclusive at all, and they're
> shared in some fashion. Perhaps that issue is cleared up now?
> /me crosses all fingers and toes and prays really hard.

The I believe, is that an exclusive cpuset can have an exclusive parent
and exclusive children, which obviously all overlap one another, and
thus you have to do the partition only at the top-most exclusive cpuset.

Currently, cpusets is creating partitions in cpus_exclusive children as
well, which breaks balancing for the parent.

The patch I posted previously should (modulo bugs) only do partitioning
in the top-most cpuset. I still need clarification from Paul as to why
this is unacceptable, though.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
-
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/