At some point in the past, I wrote: >> It's meant to flatten the hierarchy ... >> ... >> The hierarchy is meant to be there, just ... On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 11:51:20PM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote: > _What_ is meant to flatten the hierarchy ?? To what does "It" refer ?? > So is the hierarchy of CKRM there or not -- you've confused me. > And in any case, are we in agreement that any such CKRM hierarchy > is not isomorphic to the cpuset hierarchy? The numerical share assignments. I don't have the intestinal fortitude to pore over the pronouns used in the last message. The hierarchy used in CKRM is there. I don't know if the CKRM hierarchy is different from yours or not. It's a subgraph of the process inheritance hierarchy. At any rate, I'll hope my little request to have similar mechanisms consolidated is heeded somehow and bow out at this point. -- wli - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Thu Sep 25 03:02:03 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:17 EST