linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
	Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@ubuntu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] cgroup TODOs
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 09:40:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120917164002.GA18677@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120917150518.GB5094@redhat.com>

Hello,

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:05:18AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> As a developer, I will be happy to support only one model and keep code
> simple. I am only concerned that for blkcg we have still not charted
> out a clear migration path. The warning message your patch is giving
> out will work only if we decide to not treat task and groups at same
> level.

It may not be enough but it still is in the right direction.

> > Another problem is that configuration isn't contained in cgroup
> > proper.  We need a way to assign weights to individual tasks which can
> > be somehow directly compared against group weights.  cpu cooks
> > priority for this and blkcg may be able to cook ioprio but it's nasty
> > and unobvious.  Also, let's say we grow network bandwidth controller
> > for whatever reason.  What value are we gonna use?
> 
> So if somebody cares about settting SO_PRIORITY for traffic originating
> from a tasks, move it into a cgroup. Otherwise they all get default
> priority.

I don't know.  Do we wanna add, say, prctl for memory weight too?

> So to me, leaving this decision to userspace based on their requirement
> makes sense.

Leaving too many decisions to userland is one of the reasons that got
us into this mess, so I'm not sold on flexibility for flexibility's
sake.

> Yes, creating a hidden group for tasks in current group should not be
> hard from implementation point of view. But again, I am concerned about
> configuration of hidden group and I also don't like the idea of taking
> flexibility away from user to treat tasks and group at same level.

I don't know.  Create a reserved directory for it?  I do like the idea
of taking flexibility away form user unless it's actually useful but
am a bit worried we might be too late for that. :(

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-17 16:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-13 20:58 [RFC] cgroup TODOs Tejun Heo
2012-09-14  9:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-09-14 17:17   ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-14  9:10 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2012-09-14 13:58   ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-14 19:29     ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-14 21:51       ` Kay Sievers
     [not found] ` <5052E7DF.7040000@parallels.com>
2012-09-14  9:12   ` Li Zefan
2012-09-14 11:22     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-14 17:59     ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-14 18:23       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-14 18:33         ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-14 17:43   ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-17  8:50     ` Glauber Costa
2012-09-17 17:21       ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-14 11:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-14 12:54   ` Daniel P. Berrange
2012-09-14 17:53   ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-14 14:25 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-14 14:53   ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-09-14 15:14     ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-14 21:57       ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-17 15:27         ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-18 18:08         ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-14 21:39   ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-17 15:05     ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-17 16:40       ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2012-09-14 15:03 ` Michal Hocko
2012-09-19 14:02   ` Michal Hocko
2012-09-19 14:03     ` [PATCH 2.6.32] memcg: warn on deeper hierarchies with use_hierarchy==0 Michal Hocko
2012-09-19 19:38       ` David Rientjes
2012-09-20 13:24         ` Michal Hocko
2012-09-20 22:33           ` David Rientjes
2012-09-21  7:16             ` Michal Hocko
2012-09-19 14:03     ` [PATCH 3.0] " Michal Hocko
2012-09-19 14:05     ` [PATCH 3.2+] " Michal Hocko
2012-09-14 18:07 ` [RFC] cgroup TODOs Vivek Goyal
2012-09-14 18:53   ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-14 19:28     ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-14 19:44       ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-14 19:49         ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-14 20:39           ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-17  8:40             ` Glauber Costa
2012-09-17 17:30               ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-17 14:37             ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-14 18:36 ` Aristeu Rozanski
2012-09-14 18:54   ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-15  2:20   ` Serge E. Hallyn
2012-09-15  9:27     ` Controlling devices and device namespaces Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-15 22:05       ` Serge E. Hallyn
2012-09-16  0:24         ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-16  3:31           ` Serge E. Hallyn
2012-09-16 11:21           ` Alan Cox
2012-09-16 11:56             ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-16 12:17               ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-16 13:32                 ` Serge Hallyn
2012-09-16 14:23                   ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-16 16:13                     ` Alan Cox
2012-09-16 17:49                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-16 16:15                     ` Serge Hallyn
2012-09-16 16:53                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-16  8:19   ` [RFC] cgroup TODOs James Bottomley
2012-09-16 14:41     ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-17 13:21     ` Aristeu Rozanski
2012-09-14 22:03 ` Dhaval Giani
2012-09-14 22:06   ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-20  1:33 ` Andy Lutomirski
2012-09-20 18:26   ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-20 18:39     ` Andy Lutomirski
2012-09-21 21:40 ` Tejun Heo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120917164002.GA18677@google.com \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=acme@ghostprotocols.net \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=glommer@parallels.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=serge.hallyn@ubuntu.com \
    --cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).