On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 06:44:27PM +0530, Dinakar Guniguntala wrote: > > > > On the other hand, Dinakar had more work to do than you might, because > > he needed a complete covering (so had to round up cpus in non exclusive > > cpusets to form more covering elements). From what I can tell, you > > don't need a complete covering - it seems fine if some cpus are not > > managed by this resource control function. > > > I think it makes more sense to add this functionality directly as part > of the existing cpusets instead of creating further leaf cpusets (or > subcpusets > as you call it) where we can specify resource control parameters. I think > that > approach would be much more intuitive and simple to work with rather than > what you have currently.
If what subcpusets is doing is slicing cpusets resources, then wouldn't it be more intusive to call them slice0, slice1 etc. under the respective cpuset ? Thanks Dipankar - 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/
