All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mingo@redhat.com, lizefan@huawei.com,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, pjt@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@fb.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: cgroup NAKs ignored? Re: [PATCHSET RFC cgroup/for-4.6] cgroup, sched: implement resource group and PRIO_RGRP
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 18:13:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160312171318.GD1108@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1457802262.3628.129.camel@gmail.com>


* Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 2016-03-12 at 07:26 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 10:41 -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > This patchset extends cgroup v2 to support rgroup (resource group) for
> > > in-process hierarchical resource control and implements PRIO_RGRP for
> > > setpriority(2) on top to allow in-process hierarchical CPU cycle
> > > control in a seamless way.
> > > 
> > > cgroup v1 allowed putting threads of a process in different cgroups
> > > which enabled ad-hoc in-process resource control of some resources.
> 
> BTW, within the scheduler, "process" does not exist. [...]

Yes, and that's very fundamental.

And I see that many bits of the broken 'v2' cgroups ABI already snuck into the 
upstream kernel in this merge dinwo, without this detail having been agreed upon!
:-(

Tejun, this _REALLY_ sucks. We had pending NAKs over the design, still you moved 
ahead like nothing happened, why?!

> [...]  A high level composite entity is what we currently aggregate from 
> arbitrary individual entities, a.k.a threads.  Whether an individual entity be 
> an un-threaded "process" bash, a thread of "process" oracle, or one of 
> "process!?!" kernel is irrelevant.  What entity aggregation has to do with 
> "process" eludes me completely.
> 
> What's ad-hoc or unusual about a thread pool servicing an arbitrary number of 
> customers using cgroup bean accounting?  Job arrives from customer, worker is 
> dispatched to customer workshop (cgroup), it does whatever on behest of 
> customer, sends bean count off to the billing department, and returns to the 
> break room.  What's so annoying about using bean counters for.. counting beans 
> that you want to forbid it?

Agreed ... and many others expressed this concern as well. Why were these concerns 
ignored?

Thanks,

	Ingo

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org,
	akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org,
	a.p.zijlstra-/NLkJaSkS4VmR6Xm/wNWPw@public.gmane.org,
	mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	lizefan-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org,
	pjt-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	kernel-team-b10kYP2dOMg@public.gmane.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: cgroup NAKs ignored? Re: [PATCHSET RFC cgroup/for-4.6] cgroup, sched: implement resource group and PRIO_RGRP
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 18:13:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160312171318.GD1108@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1457802262.3628.129.camel-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>


* Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 2016-03-12 at 07:26 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-03-11 at 10:41 -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > This patchset extends cgroup v2 to support rgroup (resource group) for
> > > in-process hierarchical resource control and implements PRIO_RGRP for
> > > setpriority(2) on top to allow in-process hierarchical CPU cycle
> > > control in a seamless way.
> > > 
> > > cgroup v1 allowed putting threads of a process in different cgroups
> > > which enabled ad-hoc in-process resource control of some resources.
> 
> BTW, within the scheduler, "process" does not exist. [...]

Yes, and that's very fundamental.

And I see that many bits of the broken 'v2' cgroups ABI already snuck into the 
upstream kernel in this merge dinwo, without this detail having been agreed upon!
:-(

Tejun, this _REALLY_ sucks. We had pending NAKs over the design, still you moved 
ahead like nothing happened, why?!

> [...]  A high level composite entity is what we currently aggregate from 
> arbitrary individual entities, a.k.a threads.  Whether an individual entity be 
> an un-threaded "process" bash, a thread of "process" oracle, or one of 
> "process!?!" kernel is irrelevant.  What entity aggregation has to do with 
> "process" eludes me completely.
> 
> What's ad-hoc or unusual about a thread pool servicing an arbitrary number of 
> customers using cgroup bean accounting?  Job arrives from customer, worker is 
> dispatched to customer workshop (cgroup), it does whatever on behest of 
> customer, sends bean count off to the billing department, and returns to the 
> break room.  What's so annoying about using bean counters for.. counting beans 
> that you want to forbid it?

Agreed ... and many others expressed this concern as well. Why were these concerns 
ignored?

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-12 17:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 95+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-11 15:41 [PATCHSET RFC cgroup/for-4.6] cgroup, sched: implement resource group and PRIO_RGRP Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 01/10] cgroup: introduce cgroup_[un]lock() Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41   ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 02/10] cgroup: un-inline cgroup_path() and friends Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 03/10] cgroup: introduce CGRP_MIGRATE_* flags Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41   ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 04/10] signal: make put_signal_struct() public Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 05/10] cgroup, fork: add @new_rgrp_cset[p] and @clone_flags to cgroup fork callbacks Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41   ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 06/10] cgroup, fork: add @child and @clone_flags to threadgroup_change_begin/end() Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 07/10] cgroup: introduce resource group Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41   ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 08/10] cgroup: implement rgroup control mask handling Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41   ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 09/10] cgroup: implement rgroup subtree migration Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41 ` [PATCH 10/10] cgroup, sched: implement PRIO_RGRP for {set|get}priority() Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 15:41   ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 16:05 ` Example program for PRIO_RGRP Tejun Heo
2016-03-11 16:05   ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-12  6:26 ` [PATCHSET RFC cgroup/for-4.6] cgroup, sched: implement resource group and PRIO_RGRP Mike Galbraith
2016-03-12  6:26   ` Mike Galbraith
2016-03-12 17:04   ` Mike Galbraith
2016-03-12 17:04     ` Mike Galbraith
2016-03-12 17:13     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2016-03-12 17:13       ` cgroup NAKs ignored? " Ingo Molnar
2016-03-13 14:42       ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-13 14:42         ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-13 15:00   ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-13 15:00     ` Tejun Heo
2016-03-13 17:40     ` Mike Galbraith
2016-03-13 17:40       ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-07  0:00       ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-07  0:00         ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-07  3:26         ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-07  3:26           ` Mike Galbraith
2016-03-14  2:23     ` Mike Galbraith
2016-03-14  2:23       ` Mike Galbraith
2016-03-14 11:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-14 11:30   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-06 15:58   ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-06 15:58     ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-06 15:58     ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-07  6:45     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07  6:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07  7:35       ` Johannes Weiner
2016-04-07  7:35         ` Johannes Weiner
2016-04-07  8:05         ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-07  8:05           ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-07  8:08         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07  8:08           ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07  9:28           ` Johannes Weiner
2016-04-07  9:28             ` Johannes Weiner
2016-04-07 10:42             ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07 10:42               ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07 19:45           ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-07 19:45             ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-07 20:25             ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07 20:25               ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-08 20:11               ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-08 20:11                 ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-09  6:16                 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-09  6:16                   ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-09 13:39                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-09 13:39                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-12 22:29                   ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-12 22:29                     ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-13  7:43                     ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-13  7:43                       ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-13 15:59                       ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-13 19:15                         ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-13 19:15                           ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-14  6:07                         ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-14 19:57                           ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-14 19:57                             ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-15  2:42                             ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-15  2:42                               ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-09 16:02                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-09 16:02                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07  8:28         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07  8:28           ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07 19:04           ` Johannes Weiner
2016-04-07 19:04             ` Johannes Weiner
2016-04-07 19:31             ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07 19:31               ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07 20:23               ` Johannes Weiner
2016-04-07 20:23                 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-04-08  3:13                 ` Mike Galbraith
2016-04-08  3:13                   ` Mike Galbraith
2016-03-15 17:21 ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-15 17:21   ` Michal Hocko
2016-04-06 21:53   ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-06 21:53     ` Tejun Heo
2016-04-07  6:40     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-04-07  6:40       ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20160312171318.GD1108@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.