From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267758AbUHJViM (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:38:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267751AbUHJViM (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:38:12 -0400 Received: from jade.spiritone.com ([216.99.193.136]:46806 "EHLO jade.spiritone.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267755AbUHJVg7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:36:59 -0400 Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 07:50:10 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Erich Focht , Paul Jackson cc: lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, akpm@osdl.org, hch@infradead.org, steiner@sgi.com, jbarnes@sgi.com, sylvain.jeaugey@bull.net, djh@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, colpatch@us.ibm.com, Simon.Derr@bull.net, ak@suse.de, sivanich@sgi.com Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] cpusets - big numa cpu and memory placement Message-ID: <2447730000.1091976606@[10.10.2.4]> In-Reply-To: <200408071722.36705.efocht@hpce.nec.com> References: <20040805100901.3740.99823.84118@sam.engr.sgi.com> <200408061730.06175.efocht@hpce.nec.com> <20040806231013.2b6c44df.pj@sgi.com> <200408071722.36705.efocht@hpce.nec.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > If I understand correctly, CKRM is fine for simple resources like > amount of memory or cputime and designed to control flexible sharing > of these resources and ensure some degree of fairness. Cpusets is a > complex NUMA specific compound resource which actually only allows for > a rather static distribution across processes (especially with the > exclusive bits set). Including cpusets control into CKRM will be > trivial, because you already provide all that's needed. I'd disagree with this - both are mechanisms for controlling the amount of CPU time and memory that processes get to use. They have fundamentally the same objective ... having 2 mechanisms to do the same thing with different interfaces doesn't seem like a good plan. I don't think CKRM is anything like as far away from being ready as you seem to be implying - we're talking about a month or two, I think. M.