From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Split process across multiple schedulers? Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 07:32:32 -1000 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=gPiP2TEj1iJh+74qfIuMhil4PD7R84NUaohWqsH6kSA=; b=i0C6IyVxhui172CDcTzYtyC8+1jj4hUP1Z7WUT42kUCKeZ0sdQKeUgP2kAKqMqdDnY Zt9SOENS6uK7ACzOJyyXX0HxwyNOrXx2bdI0rsWLy+ae0f/dwhIax2fDr64Uljrx9WK6 SAC26tzU6ppoXy7OvzA4SzdgE2hPUWKu3keayE5D6XG84/AFZiZ6svjQkUFNT3LKLce4 4f4IJ+066LXeXk6wY+r36MMP0//Q9lZxbJVdl9W3PCcB8K2B50m0PeTiApom3wDonDrq j0CCxYELS7/d5VoefJuULsI7vCeHYTHiJCat8fw5kK/W4z2VArB2+kDqF+q0aZAsp2xm y7JA== Sender: Tejun Heo Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Olsson John Cc: "cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" Hello, On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 04:49:29PM +0000, Olsson John wrote: > By using cgroup you can delegate the authority to configure a subset > of the hierarchy via rwx and user, group, others. By using the > per-task interface you have to be root, right? Yeah, deligation can be useful. However, given that the configuration would need some automation / scripting anyway, it shouldn't be too difficult to work around. > Also, we want to separate the configuration of the threads from the > application as it need to be deployed in different hardware scenarios. The thing is, to put different threads of a process into different cgroups, one has to know which threads are doing what, which is the same knowledge needed to configure per-thread attributes. > And we need to be able to easily replicate a configuration from one > machine to another machine. Again, I'm not sure how needing to put different threads into different cgroups is much different. > We also need to configure other aspects that cgroup allows us to do > for the set of processes. This one, I agree. There are controller features which aren't available through regular thread interface such as bandwidth throttling. > Since cgroup solves all of the above problems for us, why using > something else? :) Yeah, mostly curious from cgroup design POV. It'd be nice to support use cases like this well but we likely don't wanna twist anything for it. Thanks. -- tejun