[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1290171648.2109.1580.camel@laptop>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:00:48 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@...-lyon.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Hans-Peter Jansen <hpj@...la.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, david@...g.hm,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 07:55 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> > In general though, I think you can say that: cgroups ass overhead.
>
> I really think you meant "add" here ? (Hey! The keys were next to each other!)
> ;)
Uhm, quite!
> > Simply because you add constraints, this means you need to 1) account
> > more, 2) enforce constraints. Both have definite non-zero cost in both
> > data and time.
>
> Yep, this looks like one of these perpetual throughput vs latency trade-offs.
>
Trade-off sure, throughput vs latency only in a specific use-case, its
more a feature vs cost thing, just like all them trace people want lower
cost tracing but want more features at the same time..
--
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