On Mon, 2015-04-27 at 23:44 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > So, we need an API to modify the wq_unbound_cpumask, and I provided
> > this public function. Otherwise, the other code can't modify it.
>
> I see. I don't have too strong an opinion; however, changing the mask
> is a fairly heavy operation. Are there specific reasons why we don't
> want to follow the nohz config right away?
Isolation is not only applicable to nohz_full. Many loads are
unsuitable for nohz_full, yet require maximum isolation.
ATM, nohz_full is not dynamic, but hopefully one day will be. In the
here and now, we can isolate cores from the scheduler on the fly via
cpusets, a prime API user candidate.
-Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
