(replying again as plain text for mailing lists)
----- On Jan 22, 2020, at 10:44 AM, Jan Ziak firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
I would like to note that this does not help userspace to express dynamic scheduling relationships among processes/threads such as "do not run processes A and B on the same core" or "run processes A and B on cores sharing the same L2 cache".
Indeed, this is not what this system call is trying to solve. Does the name "pin_on_cpu" lead to confusion here ?
I thought that cgroups was already the mechanism taking care of this kind of requirement.