> Hmmm, AFAICS, sched_getaffinity() and sched_setaffinity()
> allow the calling process to be bound to the nominated CPU(s), but that is not
> the same as giving them exclusive access, is it? In other words, other
> processes which have no particualr affinity needs can presumably still be
> scheduled to run on the same processor.
>
> I am looking for something more akin to the patch I referred to...or did I miss
> something in the effect of set_cpus_allowed()?
The NUMA scheduler work can trivially be converted into arbitrary
scheduler pools - they are not designed for dynamic modification
at the moment, but could be without too much effort I think.
Around 2.5.59 or so I posted a patch to rename them to pools, though
we had a few other things to sort out at the time. I might revive it
at some point - it's pretty simple.
M.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 15 2003 - 22:00:28 EST