On 2012/9/13 0:34, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 01:37:28PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: >> "If a cpuset is cpu or mem exclusive, no other cpuset, other than >> a direct ancestor or descendant, may share any of the same CPUs or >> Memory Nodes." >> >> So I think it tricked me as well. I was under the impression that >> "exclusive" would also disallow the kids. > > You two are confusing me even more. AFAICS, the hierarchical > properties don't seem to change whether exclusive is set or not. It > still ensures children can't have something parent doesn't allow and > exclusive applies to whether to share something with siblings, so I > don't think anything is broken hierarchy-wise. Am I missing > something? If so, please be explicit and elaborate where and how it's > broken. > Ignore it. I misunderstood the exclusive flag. Sorry for the noise. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
