OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [PATCH, v6 0/3] Introduce timer slack controller
Re: [PATCH, v6 3/3] cgroups: introduce timer slack controller [message #41703 is a reply to message #41678] Mon, 14 February 2011 23:39 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Matt Helsley is currently offline  Matt Helsley
Messages: 86
Registered: August 2006
Member
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 12:39:39AM +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 06:01:06PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > B1;2401;0cOn Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 03:00:03PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Kirill A. Shutsemov wrote:
> > > > > From: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>

<snip>

> > > > > + list_for_each_entry(cur, &cgroup->children, sibling) {
> > > > > + child = cgroup_to_tslack_cgroup(cur);
> > > > > + if (type == TIMER_SLACK_MIN && val > child->min_slack_ns)
> > > > > + return -EBUSY;
> > > >
> > > > I thought the whole point is to propagate values through the group.
> > >
> > > I think silent change here is wrong. cpuset returns -EBUSY in similar
> > > case.
> >
> > And how is cpuset relevant for this ? Not at all. This is about

I agree with Thomas here -- cpusets aren't relevant.

> > timer_slack and we better have a well defined scheme for all of this
> > and not some cobbled together thing with tons of exceptions and corner
> > cases. Of course undocumented as far the code goes.
>
> I don't like silent cascade changes. Userspace can implement it if

It need not be totally silent. memcg has a "use_hierarchy" flag file.
Alternately, you could punt for now and disable hierarchy somewhat like
blkio does.

> needed. -EBUSY is appropriate.

Hmm, I haven't thought about that method of cascading enough. The important
question to consider is how will the parent cgroup be constrained if the
owner/group of the children is different and thus disallows userspace from
implementing this cascade. I suppose it's consistent with the owner/group
ids but it hardly seems consistent with the "spirit" of using cgroups to
enable things like containers.

Cheers,
-Matt Helsley
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containe rs
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: [PATCH 1/1, v6] cgroup/freezer: add per freezer duty ratio control
Next Topic: [PATCH 1/3] pid: Remove the child_reaper special case in init/main.c
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Nov 01 02:23:35 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.06777 seconds