From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265909AbUJHV4x (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:56:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265805AbUJHV4x (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:56:53 -0400 Received: from gizmo10ps.bigpond.com ([144.140.71.20]:52675 "HELO gizmo10ps.bigpond.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S265943AbUJHV4P (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:56:15 -0400 Message-ID: <41670CFC.1020306@bigpond.net.au> Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 07:56:12 +1000 From: Peter Williams User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: colpatch@us.ibm.com CC: Nick Piggin , Erich Focht , LSE Tech , Paul Jackson , "Martin J. Bligh" , Andrew Morton , ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, LKML , simon.derr@bull.net, frankeh@watson.ibm.com Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC PATCH] scheduler: Dynamic sched_domains References: <1097110266.4907.187.camel@arrakis> <200410081214.20907.efocht@hpce.nec.com> <41666E90.2000208@yahoo.com.au> <1097261691.5650.23.camel@arrakis> In-Reply-To: <1097261691.5650.23.camel@arrakis> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Matthew Dobson wrote: > On Fri, 2004-10-08 at 03:40, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>And so you want to make a partition with CPUs {0,1,2,4,5}, and {3,6,7} >>for some crazy reason, the new domains would look like this: >> >>0 1 2 4 5 3 6 7 >>--- - --- - --- <- 0 >> | | | | | >> ----- - - - <- 1 >> | | | | >> ------- ----- <- 2 (global, partitioned) >> >>Agreed? You don't need to get fancier than that, do you? >> >>Then how to input the partitions... you could have a sysfs entry that >>takes the complete partition info in the form: >> >>0,1,2,3 4,5,6 7,8 ... >> >>Pretty dumb and simple. > > > How do we describe the levels other than the first? We'd either need > to: > 1) come up with a language to describe the full tree. For your example > I quoted above: > echo "0,1,2,4,5 3,6 7,8;0,1,2 4,5 3 6,7;0,1 2 4,5 3 6,7" > partitions I think the idea was that the full hierarchy was (automatically) derived from the partition in a way that best matched the physical layout of the machine? > > 2) have multiple files: > echo "0,1,2,4,5 3,6,7" > level2 > echo "0,1,2 4,5 3 6,7" > level1 > echo "0,1 2 4,5 3 6,7" > level0 > > 3) Or do it hierarchically as Paul implemented in cpusets, and as I > described in an earlier mail: > mkdir level2 > echo "0,1,2,4,5 3,6,7" > level2/partitions > mkdir level1 > echo "0,1,2 4,5 3 6,7" > level1/partitions > mkdir level0 > echo "0,1 2 4,5 3 6,7" > level0/partitions > > I personally like the hierarchical idea. Machine topologies tend to > look tree-like, and every useful sched_domain layout I've ever seen has > been tree-like. I think our interface should match that. > > -Matt > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > -- Peter Williams pwil3058@bigpond.net.au "Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious." -- Ambrose Bierce