From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263580AbTKXCjI (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Nov 2003 21:39:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263583AbTKXCjI (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Nov 2003 21:39:08 -0500 Received: from x35.xmailserver.org ([69.30.125.51]:60809 "EHLO x35.xmailserver.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263580AbTKXCjG (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Nov 2003 21:39:06 -0500 X-AuthUser: davidel@xmailserver.org Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 18:39:05 -0800 (PST) From: Davide Libenzi X-X-Sender: davide@bigblue.dev.mdolabs.com To: Nick Piggin cc: linux-kernel Subject: Re: [RFC] generalise scheduling classes In-Reply-To: <3FC16C60.7040604@cyberone.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [Cc list trimmed. There was the whole world] On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Nick Piggin wrote: > Technically the scheduler knows nothing about NUMA. Previously it had > local and a remote domains corresponding to inter and intra node cpu sets. > All it did was to do remote balancing a little more gently. But we'll call > it NUMA scheduling. One patch I did ages ago was using a topology matrix NxN storing distances (read move weights) from each CPU: mat[i][j] == distance/weight i <-> j At that time the matrix was bolt-in since there was no topology API. maybe now can be built a little bit more wisely using HT and NUMA topology info. - Davide