On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 09:34 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > I think the construction stuff works fine, and !->sd is the perfect cue > to tell various things to keep their grubby mitts off of a CPU.
Take idle_balance() for instance.. not much point in dropping rq->lock just to take it again after doing _nothing_, and we certainly wouldn't want to go play load balancer for connected CPUs anyway, we might get something much more important to do RSN. (that applies to rt in general - go off and play load balancer in the SCHED_OTHER slums? Surely you jest, elite snobs don't do skut work, they actually might get their hands dirty;) Or, at user discretion, telling CPUPRI stuff that no load balancing also means no rt balancing, i.e. the user assumes responsibility for ALL task placement, so we don't need to call neutered functions or spend cycles maintaining data we will have no use for until the user tells us he is finished with these CPUs. etc. -Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
