You forgot to include the cgroup maintainers. -- Steve On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 16:17:34 +0800 王贇 <yun.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, folks > > We are dealing with isolcpus these days and try to do the isolation > dynamically. > > The kernel doc lead us into the cpuset.sched_load_balance, it's fine > to achieve the dynamic isolation with it, however we got problem with > the systemd stuff. > > It's keeping create cgroup with sched_load_balance enabled on default, > while the cpus are overlapped with the isolated ones, which lead into > sched domain rebuild and these cpus become non-isolated. > > We're just looking forward an easy way to dynamic isolate some cpus, > just like the isolation parameter, but sched_load_balance forcing us > to dealing with the management of cgroups, we really don't get the > point in here... > > Why do we have to mix the isolation with cgroups? Why not just provide > a proc entry to read cpumask and rebuild the domains? > > Please let us know if there is any good reason to make the dynamic > isolation in that way, appreciated in advance :-) > > Regards, > Michael Wang
