Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:15:28 -0700 From: hiren panchasara <hiren.panchasara@gmail.com> To: Nick Sivo <nick@ycombinator.com> Cc: Mahdi Dashtbozorgi <mdasht@gmail.com>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dedicate the most available cpu cores to my application Message-ID: <CALCpEUFC_iPF=uP9xn41Rrt8N85ev3JbhNSVJQtdX0G%2Bc9ve1w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAM72HBbeB_2Hg1uwhUs51NDrJH-TDYUjKDFPoiHSNc0=-67YPQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAB5=vGZ3zgFf4xHyFdxwe=su_sjXHNT_gS55xAo3bnzmSS_t1w@mail.gmail.com> <CAM72HBbeB_2Hg1uwhUs51NDrJH-TDYUjKDFPoiHSNc0=-67YPQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Nick Sivo <nick@ycombinator.com> wrote: > I'd actually like to do the opposite of this, and have run into the > same problem. > > cpuset -s 1 -l 0 > cpuset: setaffinity: Resource deadlock avoided I see the same problem on -CURRENT. fwiw, a fix is being discussed and worked on: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2014-June/045292.html I am going to try and apply the proposed patch https://phabric.freebsd.org/D141 to see how it behaves. cheers, Hiren
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CALCpEUFC_iPF=uP9xn41Rrt8N85ev3JbhNSVJQtdX0G%2Bc9ve1w>