Ingo Molnar wrote:
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
note that no matter how much scheduler logic, in the end
cross-scheduling of tasks between nodes on NUMA will always have a
permanent penalty (i.e. the 'migration cost' is 'infinity' in the long
run), so the primary focus _hast to be_
Ingo Molnar wrote:
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
note that no matter how much scheduler logic, in the end
cross-scheduling of tasks between nodes on NUMA will always have a
permanent penalty (i.e. the 'migration cost' is 'infinity' in the long
run), so the primary focus _hast to be_
* Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3/5
> The fundamental problem that Suresh has with balance on exec and fork
> is that it only tries to balance the top level domain with the flag
> set.
>
> This was worked around by removing degenerate domains, but is still a
> problem if people want
3/5
The fundamental problem that Suresh has with balance on exec and fork
is that it only tries to balance the top level domain with the flag
set.
This was worked around by removing degenerate domains, but is still a
problem if people want to start using more complex sched-domains, especially
3/5
The fundamental problem that Suresh has with balance on exec and fork
is that it only tries to balance the top level domain with the flag
set.
This was worked around by removing degenerate domains, but is still a
problem if people want to start using more complex sched-domains, especially
* Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3/5
The fundamental problem that Suresh has with balance on exec and fork
is that it only tries to balance the top level domain with the flag
set.
This was worked around by removing degenerate domains, but is still a
problem if people want to start
6 matches
Mail list logo
