[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EC47632.2000904@parallels.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:49:22 -0200
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <paul@...lmenage.org>,
<lizf@...fujitsu.com>, <daniel.lezcano@...e.fr>,
<a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
<fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/14] Change CPUACCT to default n
On 11/16/2011 09:52 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:51:27 +0530
> Balbir Singh<bsingharora@...il.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> On the other hand, I don't think much discussion remains for cpuacct,
>>> everyone's pretty unanimous in that they'd like to see it deprecated.
>>> By splitting this up we can close out that quickly while we figure out the
>>> best way to resolve the above.
>>>
>>
>> I'd give it a thumbs up, if we can create sched groups and provide
>> accounting without control - like we can for the memory cgroup today.
>>
>
> Isn't it possible ?
>
> Thanks,
> -Kame
>
I must say I don't really understand what exactly you propose, and how
it is different from what we have today.
My take is that you are talking about a single cgroup in which you can
have the functionality of both cpuacct and cpu, but surrounded by knobs
that allows you to turn them off individually.
Am I right?
--
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