Re: Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option? (may have realtime uses)

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...>
Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Con Kolivas <kernel@...>, Derek L. Fults <dfults@...>, devik <devik@...>, Dinakar Guniguntala <dino@...>, Emmanuel Pacaud <emmanuel.pacaud@...>, Frederik Deweerdt <deweerdt@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Matthew Dobson <colpatch@...>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...>, <rostedt@...>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...>, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...>, Paul Menage <menage@...>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...>, Randy.Dunlap <rddunlap@...>, <suresh.b.siddha@...>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>
Date: Monday, June 2, 2008 - 5:41 pm

On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 11:39:34AM -0700, Max Krasnyansky wrote:

Although it seemed like something of a hack, we experimented with this
previously and found that it didn't work reliably.  I'm sure things
have gotten better, but will need to revisit.


Until a proven reliable method for doing this is firmly in place (as
firmly as anything is, anyway),  I don't think we should be removing
the alternative.


Nice idea.


What sort of conflict are we talking about?  I assume once you've begun setting up cpusets that include those cpus that you're intention is to change the original behavior.

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

Messages in current thread:
Re: Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option?..., Michael Trimarchi, (Thu Jun 5, 10:57 am)
Re: Inquiry: Should we remove "isolcpus= kernel boot option?..., Dimitri Sivanich, (Mon Jun 2, 5:41 pm)