On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 17:06 +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 04:56:04PM +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 16:48 +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > > > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 04:40:54PM +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 15:39 +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > > > > > ACPI 4.0 defines processor aggregator device. The device can notify OS to idle > > > > > some CPUs to save power. This isn't to hot remove cpus, but just makes cpus > > > > > idle. > > > > > > > > > > This patch adds one API to change cpuset top group's cpus. If we want to > > > > > make one cpu idle, simply remove the cpu from cpuset top group's cpu list, > > > > > then all tasks will be migrate to other cpus, and other tasks will not be > > > > > migrated to this cpu again. No functional changes. > > > > > > > > > > We will use this API in new ACPI processor aggregator device driver later. > > > > > > > > I don't think so. There really is a lot more to do than move processes > > > > about. > > > no processor running is good enough for us, we don't care about interrupts/softirq/ > > > timers so far. > > > > Well, I don't care for this interface. > > > > > > Furthermore, I object to being able to remove online cpus from the top > > > > cpuset, that just doesn't make sense. > > > > > > > > I'd suggest using hotplug for this. > > > > > cpu hotplug involves too much things, and we are afraid it's not reliable. > > > > Then make it more reliable instead of providing ugly ass shit like this. > I wonder why this is that ugly. We have a cpu_isolated_map, which is just like > this. And just as ugly -- it should die too. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
