Re: RT sched: cpupri_vec lock contention with def_root_domain and no load balance

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Max Krasnyansky
Date: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 12:49 pm

Gregory Haskins wrote:

I beleive that's the intended behaviour. We always put cpus that are not
balanced into null sched domains. This was done since day one (ie when
cpuisol= option was introduced) and cpusets just followed the same convention.

I think the idea is that we want to make balancer a noop on those processors.
We could change cpusets code to create a root sched domain for each cpu I
guess. But can we maybe scale cpupri some other way ?

Max
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: RT sched: cpupri_vec lock contention with def_root_dom ..., Max Krasnyansky, (Wed Nov 19, 12:49 pm)
Re: RT sched: cpupri_vec lock contention with def_root_dom ..., Dimitri Sivanich, (Wed Nov 19, 12:55 pm)