mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
	Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	"Andrew Cooper" <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"David Vrabel" <david.vrabel@citrix.com>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC] xen: if on Xen, "flatten" the scheduling domain hierarchy
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 17:22:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56018050.1010009@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5600DC4B.1000509@suse.com>

On 09/22/2015 05:42 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> One other thing I just discovered: there are other consumers of the
> topology sibling masks (e.g. topology_sibling_cpumask()) as well.
> 
> I think we would want to avoid any optimizations based on those in
> drivers as well, not only in the scheduler.

I'm beginning to lose the thread of the discussion here a bit.

Juergen / Dario, could one of you summarize your two approaches, and the
(alleged) advantages and disadvantages of each one?

Thanks,
 -George

  reply	other threads:[~2015-09-22 16:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-08-18 15:55 Dario Faggioli
2015-08-18 16:53 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2015-08-20 18:16 ` Juergen Groß
2015-08-31 16:12   ` Boris Ostrovsky
2015-09-02 11:58     ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-02 14:08       ` Boris Ostrovsky
2015-09-02 14:30         ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-15 17:16           ` [Xen-devel] " Dario Faggioli
2015-09-15 16:50   ` Dario Faggioli
2015-09-21  5:49     ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-22  4:42       ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-22 16:22         ` George Dunlap [this message]
2015-09-23  4:36           ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-23  8:30             ` Dario Faggioli
2015-09-23  9:44               ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-23 10:23             ` George Dunlap
2015-09-23  7:24       ` Dario Faggioli
2015-09-23  7:35         ` Juergen Gross
2015-09-23 12:25           ` Boris Ostrovsky
2015-08-27 10:24 ` George Dunlap
2015-08-27 17:05   ` [Xen-devel] " George Dunlap
2015-09-15 14:32   ` Dario Faggioli

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=56018050.1010009@citrix.com \
    --to=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
    --cc=Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
    --cc=dario.faggioli@citrix.com \
    --cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcgrof@do-not-panic.com \
    --cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome