Re: CONFIG_ISOLATION=y (was: [PATCH 0/6] support "dataplane" mode for nohz_full)

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:10:32AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> So I'd vote for Frederic's CONFIG_ISOLATION=y, mostly because this is 
> a high level kernel feature, so it won't conflict with isolation 
> concepts in lower level subsystems such as IOMMU isolation - and other 
> higher level features like scheduler isolation are basically another 
> partial implementation we want to merge with all this...
> 

But why do we need a CONFIG flag for something that has no content?

That is, I do not see anything much; except the 'I want to stay in
userspace and kill me otherwise' flag, and I'm not sure that warrants a
CONFIG flag like this.

Other than that, its all a combination of NOHZ_FULL and cpusets/isolcpus
and whatnot.
--
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/