From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263855AbTLARrK (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:47:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263861AbTLARrK (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:47:10 -0500 Received: from [66.35.79.110] ([66.35.79.110]:2463 "EHLO www.hockin.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263855AbTLARrI (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:47:08 -0500 Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 05:49:19 -0800 From: Tim Hockin To: Nicolas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Castagn=E9?= Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: a few question on threads affinity and CPU shielding. Message-ID: <20031201134919.GA10663@hockin.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 06:43:16PM +0100, Nicolas Castagné wrote: > I was very pleased that some patches for controlling CPU affinities > were merged in the 2.5 (and 2.6) releases of the kernel. > > Where may I find precisions on the patches that are now included ? > - is there also a patch to shield cpu against the scheduler ? I have a patch around that does this (against RedHat's backported O(1)). Forward porting it should be no more difficult that creating it in the first place :) I was waiting until after 2.6.x was more stable to offer it. > - is there also a patch to shield cpu against all interruptions > (especially hard clock interrups) ? This could be added to my patch. What my patch added was a sched_setprocstate() syscall, which lets you set a CPU's run state. Currently I support: ENABLED - run any task RESTRICTED - run only tasks with (cpus_allowed == 1 << cpu) ISOLATED - run only tasks with (cpus_allowed == 1 << cpu && cpus_allowed_mask == 1 << cpu) Tim