All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, pjt@google.com,
	luto@amacapital.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
	Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] cpuset: Enable cpuset controller in default hierarchy
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 12:57:11 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180314195711.GD2943022@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1520653648.12749.20.camel@gmx.de>

Hello,

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 04:47:28AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Some form of cpu_exclusive (preferably exactly that, but something else
> could replace it) is needed to define sets that must not overlap any
> other set at creation time or any time thereafter.  A set with property
> 'exclusive' is the enabler for fundamentally exclusive (but dynamic!)
> set properties such as 'isolated' (etc etc).

I'm not sure cpu_exclusive makes sense.  A controller knob can either
belong to the parent or the cgroup itself and cpu_exclusive doesn't
make sense in either case.

1. cpu_exclusive is owned by the parent as other usual resource
   control knobs.  IOW, it's not delegatable.

   This is weird because it's asking the kernel to protect against its
   own misconfiguration and there's nothing preventing cpu_exclusive
   itself being cleared by the same entitya.

2. cpu_exclusive is owned by the cgroup itself like memory.oom_group.
   IOW, it's delegatable.

   This allows a cgroup to affect what its siblings can or cannot do,
   which is broken.  Semantically, it doesn't make much sense either.

I don't think it's a good idea to add a kernel mechanism to prevent
misconfiguration from a single entity.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, pjt@google.com,
	luto@amacapital.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
	Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] cpuset: Enable cpuset controller in default hierarchy
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 12:57:11 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180314195711.GD2943022@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1520653648.12749.20.camel@gmx.de>

Hello,

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 04:47:28AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Some form of cpu_exclusive (preferably exactly that, but something else
> could replace it) is needed to define sets that must not overlap any
> other set at creation time or any time thereafter.  A set with property
> 'exclusive' is the enabler for fundamentally exclusive (but dynamic!)
> set properties such as 'isolated' (etc etc).

I'm not sure cpu_exclusive makes sense.  A controller knob can either
belong to the parent or the cgroup itself and cpu_exclusive doesn't
make sense in either case.

1. cpu_exclusive is owned by the parent as other usual resource
   control knobs.  IOW, it's not delegatable.

   This is weird because it's asking the kernel to protect against its
   own misconfiguration and there's nothing preventing cpu_exclusive
   itself being cleared by the same entitya.

2. cpu_exclusive is owned by the cgroup itself like memory.oom_group.
   IOW, it's delegatable.

   This allows a cgroup to affect what its siblings can or cannot do,
   which is broken.  Semantically, it doesn't make much sense either.

I don't think it's a good idea to add a kernel mechanism to prevent
misconfiguration from a single entity.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-14 19:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-09 15:35 [PATCH v4] cpuset: Enable cpuset controller in default hierarchy Waiman Long
2018-03-09 15:35 ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 16:34 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 16:34   ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 17:23   ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 17:23     ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 17:45   ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 17:45     ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 18:17     ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 18:17       ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 18:20       ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 18:20         ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 18:20         ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 19:40         ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 19:40           ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 20:43           ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 20:43             ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 22:17             ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-09 22:17               ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-09 23:06               ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 23:06                 ` Waiman Long
2018-03-10  3:47                 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-10  3:47                   ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-14 19:57                   ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2018-03-14 19:57                     ` Tejun Heo
2018-03-15  2:49                     ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-15  2:49                       ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-19 15:34                       ` Tejun Heo
2018-03-19 15:34                         ` Tejun Heo
2018-03-19 20:49                         ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-19 20:49                           ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-19 21:41                           ` Waiman Long
2018-03-19 21:41                             ` Waiman Long
2018-03-20  4:25                             ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-20  4:25                               ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-10 13:16                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-10 13:16                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-12 14:20                   ` Waiman Long
2018-03-12 14:20                     ` Waiman Long
2018-03-12 15:21                     ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-12 15:21                       ` Mike Galbraith

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=20180314195711.GD2943022@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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.