linux-kernel - Re: [RFD] cgroup: about multiple hierarchies

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1330466421.11248.107.camel@twins>
Date:	Tue, 28 Feb 2012 23:00:21 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	Lennart Poettering <lennart@...ttering.net>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFD] cgroup: about multiple hierarchies

On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 16:54 -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:43:54PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 16:35 -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > For
> > > cpu controller, it is priority at the group level no fixed minimum/maximum
> > > % shares. And that's a limitation of treating task and group at same level.
> > 
> > Depends on what you mean by min/max %, you can do it on the group level
> > by using bandwidth caps (for max) or inverted (max on everybody else,
> > for min).
> 
> I was referring to using pure proportional controller. max bandwidth is
> new and I am looking for a quick documentation file which describes
> what are the knobs and how to use it. Did not find any in
> Documentation/cgroups/. Is there any documentation available?

Its written in C, its at kernel/sched/fair.c ;-)

> I am assuming that max are being specified for groups in some absolute
> quantity. That is fine. It will not still be max %, as again for % you
> need fixed number of entities at any level and that's not the case with
> tasks.
> 
> Minimum for one group (max for everyone else) will also only work if 
> task and groups are not at same level.

I'm really not seeing this.

> I think the only way to get fixed % share is not to put task and group
> at same level during system configuration.

Still doesn't matter, like said, its all runnable based. If a group has
0 runnable entities it doesn't exist (more or less).
--
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/