12 Apr
2023
12 Apr
'23
8:22 p.m.
Hello, Waiman.
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 03:52:36PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
There is still a distribution hierarchy as the list of isolation CPUs have to be distributed down to the target cgroup through the hierarchy. For example,
cgroup root +- isolcpus (cpus 8,9; isolcpus) +- user.slice (cpus 1-9; ecpus 1-7; member) +- user-x.slice (cpus 8,9; ecpus 8,9; isolated) +- user-y.slice (cpus 1,2; ecpus 1,2; member)
OTOH, I do agree that this can be somewhat hacky. That is why I post it as a RFC to solicit feedback.
Wouldn't it be possible to make it hierarchical by adding another cpumask to cpuset which lists the cpus which are allowed in the hierarchy but not used unless claimed by an isolated domain?
Thanks.
--
tejun