From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Relax a restriction in sched_rt_can_attach()
Date: Mon, 04 May 2015 05:13:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1430709236.3129.42.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5546C34C.7050202@huawei.com>
On Mon, 2015-05-04 at 08:54 +0800, Zefan Li wrote:
> It's allowed to promote a task from normal to realtime after it has been
> attached to a non-root cgroup, but it will fail if the attaching happens
> after it has become realtime. I don't see how this restriction is useful.
In the CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED case, promotion will fail is there is no
bandwidth allocated.
> We are moving toward unified hierarchy where all the cgroup controllers
> are bound together, so it would make cgroups easier to use if we have less
> restrictions on attaching tasks between cgroups.
Forcing group scheduling overhead on users if they want cpuset or memory
cgroup functionality would be far from wonderful. Am I interpreting the
implications of this unification/binding properly?
(I hope not, surely the plan is not to utterly _destroy_ cgroup utility)
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-04 3:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-04 0:54 [PATCH] sched: Relax a restriction in sched_rt_can_attach() Zefan Li
2015-05-04 3:13 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2015-05-04 4:39 ` Zefan Li
2015-05-04 5:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-04 5:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-04 9:11 ` Zefan Li
2015-05-04 12:08 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-04 12:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-04 14:09 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-05 3:46 ` Zefan Li
2015-05-05 6:02 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-05 3:54 ` Zefan Li
2015-05-05 14:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 14:18 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 15:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 16:31 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 19:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 19:06 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-06 8:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 14:41 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 15:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 16:13 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 16:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 18:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-05-05 19:00 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-06 9:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-05-05 18:31 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 14:09 ` 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=1430709236.3129.42.camel@gmail.com \
--to=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.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 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).