From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965164AbVI0Vpr (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2005 17:45:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965165AbVI0Vpr (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2005 17:45:47 -0400 Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.154]:7311 "EHLO e36.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965164AbVI0Vp0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2005 17:45:26 -0400 Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] Re: [PATCH 1/3] CPUMETER: add cpumeter framework to the CPUSETS From: Chandra Seetharaman Reply-To: sekharan@us.ibm.com To: Nick Piggin Cc: Paul Jackson , KUROSAWA Takahiro , taka@valinux.co.jp, magnus.damm@gmail.com, dino@in.ibm.com, lkml , ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <1127812937.5174.6.camel@npiggin-nld.site> References: <20050908225539.0bc1acf6.pj@sgi.com> <20050909.203849.33293224.taka@valinux.co.jp> <20050909063131.64dc8155.pj@sgi.com> <20050910.161145.74742186.taka@valinux.co.jp> <20050910015209.4f581b8a.pj@sgi.com> <20050926093432.9975870043@sv1.valinux.co.jp> <20050927013751.47cbac8b.pj@sgi.com> <1127812937.5174.6.camel@npiggin-nld.site> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: IBM Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 14:45:16 -0700 Message-Id: <1127857516.4861.37.camel@linuxchandra> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 19:22 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > > Last time I looked at the CKRM cpu controller code I found > it was quite horrible, with a great deal of duplication and > very intrusive large and complex. I admit it :)... and that was the reason why we did not post that to lkml. > It could have come a long way since then, but this code looks Since we were not planning to use it there isn't much change in the code :( > much neater than the code I reviewed. > > I guess the question of the resource controller stuff is going > to come up again sooner or later. I would hope to have just a > single CPU resource controller (presumably based on cpusets), > the simpler the better ;) We were planning to start on a simplified CPU controller that can provide the functionalities CKRM is expected to provide. As I stated in an earlier email cpusubsets looks promising for CKRM, but we are not able to spend more time on it as of now as the team is very busy trimming down CKRM. > > Nick > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose.... - sekharan@us.ibm.com | .......you may get it. ----------------------------------------------------------------------