[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110112092624.GH2723@in.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 14:56:24 +0530
From: Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Re: autogroup: sched_setscheduler() fails
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 09:47:19AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 13:36 +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 08:24:41AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > > Yes, it's supposed to be transparent to cgroups.
> >
> > If cgroups doesn't want that task and if its transparent to cgroups,
> > why is it shown as part of /cgroups/tasks ? The task really doesn't
> > belong in there. Its not on the runqueue of root_task_group.
> >
> > So basically I feel that a task consumed by autogroup shouldn't ideally be
> > shown in root cgroup's tasks file.
>
> >From cgroups' viewpoint, root is where it's at. The task isn't consumed
> by autogroup either, it's only borrowed until cgroups claims it.
>
> Would you prefer that when you mount /cgroups, you see a nearly empty
> root task list because box was booted with autogroup enabled?
If I had my way, I would say yes :) I would even say make autogroups visible
so that we know exactly what it is. Let 'auto' in autogroups mean only
'automatic' and not necessarily 'hidden'.
> Should
> tasks appear and disappear on the fly while you're watching?
Why would they unless we explicitly move them ?
Anyway I guess you would have gone through these questions already.
Thanks for patiently answering :)
Regards,
Bharata.
--
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