Re: cpuset and affinity implementation


On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Jeff Roberson wrote:


On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Daniel Eischen wrote:

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Jeff Roberson wrote:

See above discussion. I'm not sure what you mean by 'default' cpuset here.

I imagine the 'default' cpuset as the system's default cpuset,
in lieu of any administratively created cpusets and bindings
for the process (inherited or explicit).

My opinion is that if we decide that it's important to assign numbered sets to tids we need then to allow cpuset_getid to return multiple ids for WHICH_PID.

Maybe there shouldn't be WHICH_PID. Perhaps it should be called
WHICH_ALLTIDS. Then it might appear more expected if
cpuset_getid(WHICH_ALLTIDS, ...) returned multiple cpusets.
I realize this is just playing with words, and I do prefer
WHICH_PID :-)

Are there any objections to commiting this functionality in its current form?

I think there is the possibility for further debate and refinement but I believe the code is stable and simple enough to hit the tree for people to start using it.

Thanks,
Jeff



--
DE

_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: cpuset and affinity implementation
    ... for the process (inherited or explicit). ... My opinion is that if we decide that it's important to assign numbered sets to tids we need then to allow cpuset_getid to return multiple ids for WHICH_PID. ... cpuset_getidreturned multiple cpusets. ...
    (freebsd-arch)
  • Re: exclusive cpusets broken with cpu hotplug
    ... you should avoid having explicit control over sched-domains in your cpusets ... cannot see what sched domains they have ended up with. ... We should either make this linkage explicit and understandable, ...
    (Linux-Kernel)