From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751979AbcGVCve (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 21 Jul 2016 22:51:34 -0400
Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:36715 "EHLO
	mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750791AbcGVCvb (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 21 Jul 2016 22:51:31 -0400
Message-ID: <1469155888.3862.26.camel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Question about group scheduler cpu shares
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: Gaurav Poothia <gaurav.poothia@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 04:51:28 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CADDfC=obwnnkVG9C8OxZ+4zHz6Oe_1_c8nOPCAjbihJUNs2jmQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADDfC=q_AkomUqKShkF=hkwjB2Tu-WMiNmfhUEPWVy1gr_xFLQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <CADDfC=obwnnkVG9C8OxZ+4zHz6Oe_1_c8nOPCAjbihJUNs2jmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.16.5 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2016-07-21 at 18:18 -0700, Gaurav Poothia wrote:

> > ROOT
> > > 
> > + -Group1(3072)
> > >    |
> > >   +- A(2048)
> > >    |
> > >    +- B(1024)
> > > 
> > +- Group2(2048)
> >      |
> >      +-C(1024)
> >      |
> >      +-D(1024)
> > 

> > Say I add a task E to Group1's task list (note that is an interior aka
> > non-leaf node)
> > How does the CPU split change between A, B and E.
> > AFAICT there is no cgroup cpu subsystem knob to weight tasks on an
> > interior node against the tasks in that node's children

A, B and E are all entities with a weight, so just plug E into your
graph.  Its weight is determined by nice level, which is what cgroups
should have done instead of inventing shares IMHO.  1024 == nice(0).

	-Mike