Paul Jackson 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 ... >> >> > >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. > > Paul, yes CKRM classes at this point are flat, we looked initially at hierarchies and determined that for the first release might add a lot of complexity with questionable benefits for the community at large. So we left hierarchies out. Based on the general community feedback we might have to revisit this issue. Again, I see cpusets and CKRM as addressing two orthogonal issues wrt to cpu's cpusets (partitioning in space) with hierarchies CKRM (time partitioning) how much of time does a class get... -- Hubertus Franke ( CKRM team ) - 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 09:23:24 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:17 EST