Re: boot cgroup questions

[Paul Jackson]

Max K wrote:
> I agree in general. In this particular case additional grouping introduces 
> even more hierarchy. I seems to me that
> 	"irqN -> cpu1, cpu2, cpu3"
> is a very simple, straightforward relationship. Whereas
> 	"irqN -> groupX"
> 	"groupX -> cpu1"
> 	"groupX -> cpu2"
> 	"groupX -> cpu3"
> Is not that straightforward.

Clearly, yes, the first is simpler than the second.

The question is which is correct.

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> 1.940.382.4214
--
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/