Re: workqueue cpu affinity

From: Max Krasnyanskiy
Date: Thu Jun 12 2008 - 15:10:30 EST


Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Sorry for being late,.. and I'm afraid most will have to wait a bit
longer :-(

On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 12:02 -0700, Max Krasnyansky wrote:
Peter Zijlstra wrote:

Please don't take this too personal - I'm glad you're working on this.
I'm just trying to see what we can generalize.

Oh, no worries, I'm not taking this personally, except maybe the "most your
ideas suck" part which got me a little bit ;-). I'm definitely all for making
it suitable for more general usage.
This is actually first constructive criticism (except for the "most of your
ideas suck" part :).

No, no, you understand me wrong (or I expressed myself wrong). Your
ideas are good, its just the implementation / execution I have issues
with.

Like with extending the isolation map, what didn't leave any room for
hard-rt smp schedulers or multiple rt domains. Whereas the cpuset stuff
does.
Yep. And I redid it completely and switched gears to fix/improve cpusets, genirq, etc.
Anyway, I think we're on the same page. Please look over the summary that I sent out and see if I missed anything.

Max
--
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/