[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141029081640.GT3337@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 09:16:40 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc: Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
Will Auld <will.auld@...el.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Cache Allocation Technology Design
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:22:15PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Oct, at 12:53:06PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > NAK, cgroups must support full hierarchies, simply enforce that the
> > child cgroup's mask is a subset of the parent's.
>
> For the specific case of Cache Allocation, if we're creating hierarchies
> from bitmasks, there's a very clear limit to how we can divide up the
> bits - we can't support an indefinite number of cgroup directories.
>
> What do you mean by "full hierarchies"?
Ah, so one way around that is to only assign a (whats the CQE equivalent
of RMIDs again?) once you stick a task in.
But basically it means you need to allow things like:
root/virt/more/crap/hostA
/hostB
/sanityA
/random/other/yunk
Now, the root will have the entire bitmask set, any child, say
virt/more/crap can also have them all set, and you can maybe only start
differentiating in the /host[AB] bits.
Whether or not it makes sense, libvirt likes to create these pointless
deep hierarchies, as do a lot of other people for that matter.
--
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