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: Mark Hounschell <dmarkh@...>
Cc: <nickpiggin@...>, <a.p.zijlstra@...>, <ioe-lkml@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <kernel@...>, <dfults@...>, <devik@...>, <sivanich@...>, <dino@...>, <emmanuel.pacaud@...>, <deweerdt@...>, <mingo@...>, <colpatch@...>, <maxk@...>, <rostedt@...>, <oleg@...>, <paulmck@...>, <menage@...>, <rddunlap@...>, <suresh.b.siddha@...>, <tglx@...>
Date: Wednesday, June 4, 2008 - 1:26 pm

Mark wrote:

Just to be sure I'm following you here, you stating that you
want to be able to manipulate the isolated cpu map at runtime,
not just with the boot option isolcpus, right?  Where this
isolated cpu map works just fine even on systems which do
not have cpusets configured, right?

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.940.382.4214
--
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?..., Paul Jackson, (Wed Jun 4, 1:26 pm)