From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Brian Welty <brian.welty@intel.com>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, "Li Zefan" <lizefan@huawei.com>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, "Michal Hocko" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
"Vladimir Davydov" <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Jani Nikula" <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
"Joonas Lahtinen" <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"Alex Deucher" <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
"ChunMing Zhou" <David1.Zhou@amd.com>,
"Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] cgroup support for GPU devices
Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 08:26:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190506152643.GL374014@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190501140438.9506-1-brian.welty@intel.com>
Hello,
On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 10:04:33AM -0400, Brian Welty wrote:
> The patch series enables device drivers to use cgroups to control the
> following resources within a GPU (or other accelerator device):
> * control allocation of device memory (reuse of memcg)
> and with future work, we could extend to:
> * track and control share of GPU time (reuse of cpu/cpuacct)
> * apply mask of allowed execution engines (reuse of cpusets)
>
> Instead of introducing a new cgroup subsystem for GPU devices, a new
> framework is proposed to allow devices to register with existing cgroup
> controllers, which creates per-device cgroup_subsys_state within the
> cgroup. This gives device drivers their own private cgroup controls
> (such as memory limits or other parameters) to be applied to device
> resources instead of host system resources.
> Device drivers (GPU or other) are then able to reuse the existing cgroup
> controls, instead of inventing similar ones.
I'm really skeptical about this approach. When creating resource
controllers, I think what's the most important and challenging is
establishing resource model - what resources are and how they can be
distributed. This patchset is going the other way around - building
out core infrastructure for bolierplates at a significant risk of
mixing up resource models across different types of resources.
IO controllers already implement per-device controls. I'd suggest
following the same interface conventions and implementing a dedicated
controller for the subsystem.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-06 15:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-01 14:04 [RFC PATCH 0/5] cgroup support for GPU devices Brian Welty
2019-05-01 14:04 ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] cgroup: Add cgroup_subsys per-device registration framework Brian Welty
2019-05-01 14:04 ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] cgroup: Change kernfs_node for directories to store cgroup_subsys_state Brian Welty
2019-05-01 14:04 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] memcg: Add per-device support to memory cgroup subsystem Brian Welty
2019-05-01 14:04 ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] drm: Add memory cgroup registration and DRIVER_CGROUPS feature bit Brian Welty
2019-05-01 14:04 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] drm/i915: Use memory cgroup for enforcing device memory limit Brian Welty
2019-05-02 8:34 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] cgroup support for GPU devices Leon Romanovsky
2019-05-02 22:48 ` Kenny Ho
2019-05-03 21:14 ` Welty, Brian
2019-05-05 7:14 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-05-05 14:21 ` Kenny Ho
2019-05-05 16:05 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-05-05 16:34 ` Kenny Ho
2019-05-05 16:55 ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-05-05 16:46 ` Chris Down
2019-05-06 15:16 ` Johannes Weiner
2019-05-06 15:26 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2019-05-07 19:50 ` Welty, Brian
2019-05-09 16:52 ` 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=20190506152643.GL374014@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=David1.Zhou@amd.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
--cc=brian.welty@intel.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=vdavydov.dev@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 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).