Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> You're saying the kernel should use these relative masks internally? > > There is just some thoughts about this. Did not have time to look into the > details. Mike?
There are a few places where the entire cpumask is not needed. For example, in the area of core siblings on a node. There's a limit to how many cores/threads can be on a node and the full 4k cpumask is not needed. How this pertains to this new functionality I'm not sure yet. > >> That means it would be impossible to run workloads that use the complete >> machine because you couldn't represent all nodes. > > Not sure how they are addressing this. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
