[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071004085451.GA8108@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 10:54:51 +0200
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, maneesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sudhir Kumar <skumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH -v2] Add sysfs control to modify a user's cpu share
> > Changelog since v1:
> > 1. Added a mutex to serialize directory creation/destruction for a user in
> > sysfs
> > 2. Added a spinlock in the task_group structure to serialize writes to
> > tg->shares.
> > 3. Removed /proc/root_user_cpu_shares.
> > 4. Added Documentation about the group scheduler.
>
> thanks - I have added this to the queue.
>
> i'm wondering about the following: could not (yet) existing UIDs be made
> configurable too? I.e. if i do this in a bootup script:
>
> echo 2048 > /sys/kernel/uids/500/cpu_share
>
> this should just work too, regardless of there not being any UID 500
> tasks yet. Likewise, once configured, the /sys/kernel/uids/* directories
> (with the settings in them) should probably not go away either.
Shouldn't that be done via uevents? E.g. UID x gets added to the sysfs tree,
generates a uevent and a script then figures out the cpu_share and sets it.
That way you also don't need to keep the directories. No?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists