Here I go, talking to myself.. On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 10:53 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> My thoughts were to make stronger use of disjoint cpu-sets. cgroups and > cpusets are related, in that cpusets provide a property to a cgroup. > However, load_balance_monitor()'s interaction with sched domains > confuses me - it might DTRT, but I can't tell. > > [ It looks to me it balances a group over the largest SD the current cpu > has access to, even though that might be larger than the SD associated > with the cpuset of that particular cgroup. ] Hmm, with a bit more thought I think that does indeed DTRT. Because, if the cpu belongs to a disjoint cpuset, the highest sd (with load-balancing enabled) would be that. Right? [ Just a bit of a shame we have all cgroups represented on each cpu. ] Also, might be a nice idea to split the daemon up if there are indeed disjoint sets - currently there is only a single daemon which touches the whole system. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
