Re: [Lse-tech] Re: CPUSET Proposal

From: William Lee Irwin III <>
Date: 2003-09-25 16:44:30
At some point in the past, I wrote:
>> Well, the thing is, CKRM essentially has the cross-resource bits and
>> makes up some group that can be joined and departed from and inherited
>> and so on with all the right knobs ...

On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:38:04PM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> The hierarchies don't correspond, or do so only accidentally.
> That is, cpusets, as proposed, have a hierarchy such that one
> cpuset is the child of another if one cpuset describes a subset
> of another's CPUs.
> At first blush, I don't see a hierarchy of CKRM Classes, rather
> just a flat space, say Gold, Silver and Bronze.

It's meant to flatten the hierarchy by using numerical measures of
share to precompute the effect of the hierarchy. A directly hierarchical
data structure representation's traversal is too inefficient to be
tolerated in certain performance-critical codepaths, e.g. schedule().

The hierarchy is meant to be there, just implemented without that
traversal in the scheduler (and elsewhere).

-- wli
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Received on Thu Sep 25 02:43:40 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:17 EST