[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1703071531140.5245@vshiva-Udesk>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 15:31:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Shivappa Vikas <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
"Shivappa, Vikas" <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"Kleen, Andi" <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
"davidcc@...gle.com" <davidcc@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@...el.com> wrote:
>>> That's all nice and good, but I still have no coherent explanation why
>>> measuring across allocation domains makes sense.
>>
>> Is this in reaction to this one?
>>
>>>> 5) Put multiple threads into a single measurement group
>>
>> If we fix it to say "threads from the same CAT group" does it fix things?
>>
> Inside a CAT partition, there may be multiple tasks split into
> different cgroups.
> We need the ability to monitor groups of tasks individually within that CAT
> partition. I think this is what this bullet is about.
>
The #8 covers that I think (or what we intended for 5..) ?
8) Can get measurements for subsets of tasks in a CAT group (to find the
threads hogging the resources).
Thanks,
Vikas
>
>> We'd like to have measurement groups use a single RMID ... if we
>> allowed tasks from different CAT groups in the same measurement
>> group we wouldn't be able to split the numbers back to report the
>> right overall total for each of the CAT groups.
>>
>> -Tony
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists