From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270015AbUJHQqo (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:46:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270019AbUJHQqo (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:46:44 -0400 Received: from omx3-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.171.20]:45985 "EHLO omx3.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270015AbUJHQqm (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:46:42 -0400 From: Jesse Barnes To: lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] Re: [RFC PATCH] scheduler: Dynamic sched_domains Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 09:43:21 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 Cc: Nick Piggin , Takayoshi Kochi , colpatch@us.ibm.com, pj@sgi.com, mbligh@aracnet.com, akpm@osdl.org, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, simon.derr@bull.net, frankeh@watson.ibm.com, hawkes@sgi.com References: <1097110266.4907.187.camel@arrakis> <20041008.145516.26538192.t-kochi@bq.jp.nec.com> <41662EC8.4040308@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <41662EC8.4040308@yahoo.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200410080943.21326.jbarnes@engr.sgi.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, October 7, 2004 11:08 pm, Nick Piggin wrote: > Takayoshi Kochi wrote: > > Yup, if SD_NODES_PER_DOMAIN is set to 4, our 32-way TX-7 have > > two disjoint domains ;( > > (though the current default is 6 for ia64...) > > > > I think the default configuration of the scheduler domains should be > > as identical to its real hardware topology as possible, and should > > modify the default only when necessary (e.g. for Altix). > > That is the idea. Unfortunately the ia64 modifications are ia64 wide. > I don't think it should be too hard to make it sn2 only. The NEC and Altix machines both use a SLIT table to describe the machine layout, so it should be possible to build them correctly w/o special case code (I hope). The question is how big to make them, but if that's runtime changeable, then no big deal. Like I said, the main thing missing from my changes is a system wide domain, but I think John has some ideas about that. Jesse