On Tuesday 03 June 2008 08:45, Peter Zijlstra wrote:On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 00:35 +0200, Ingo Oeser wrote:Hi Paul,Yeah - except that its not meant to be used as such - it will still
in short: NAK!
On Monday 02 June 2008, Paul Jackson wrote:(Aside to the RealTime folks -- is there a 'realtime'I used it to mask out a defect CPU on a 8-CPU node of a
email list which I should include in this discussion?)
The kernel has a "isolcpus=" kernel boot time parameter. This
parameter isolates CPUs from scheduler load balancing, minimizing the
impact of scheduler latencies on realtime tasks running on those CPUs.
HPC-cluster at a customer site, until the $BIG_VENDOR
sent a replacement. And to prove $BIG_VENDOR, that we actually
have a problem on THAT CPU.
So I would really like to keep this fault isolation capability.
I made my customer happy with that.
I wish Linux had more such "mask out bad hardware" features
to faciliate fault isolation and boot and runtime.
brings the cpu up, and it is still usable for the OS.
So sorry, your abuse doesn't make for a case to keep this abomination.
How come it is an abonination? It is an easy way to do what it does,
and it's actually not a bad thing for some uses not to have to use
cpusets.
Given that it's all __init code anyway, is there a real reason _to_
remove it?