From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263386AbTDLTus (for ); Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:50:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263387AbTDLTus (for ); Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:50:48 -0400 Received: from svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com ([24.136.46.5]:28689 "EHLO svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263386AbTDLTur (for ); Sat, 12 Apr 2003 15:50:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Re: Processor sets (pset) for linux kernel 2.5/2.6? From: Robert Love To: "Shaheed R. Haque" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, thockin@isunix.it.ilstu.edu In-Reply-To: <1050177383.3e986f67b7f68@netmail.pipex.net> References: <1050146434.3e97f68300fff@netmail.pipex.net> <1050177383.3e986f67b7f68@netmail.pipex.net> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1050177751.2291.468.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4 (1.2.4-2) Date: 12 Apr 2003 16:02:31 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2003-04-12 at 15:56, Shaheed R. Haque wrote: > Hmmm, AFAICS, sched_getaffinity() and sched_setaffinity() > allow the calling process to be bound to the nominated CPU(s), but that is not > the same as giving them exclusive access, is it? In other words, other > processes which have no particualr affinity needs can presumably still be > scheduled to run on the same processor. > > I am looking for something more akin to the patch I referred to...or did I miss > something in the effect of set_cpus_allowed()? We strive for simple interfaces here in Linux :) If you want to give them exclusive access, you need to bind all the other processes to the other processors. One easy way to do this is to have init bind itself elsewhere on boot. Robert Love