[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eae1cbd1-4b49-e79b-f6d4-bf62e828ebf1@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 18:01:31 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...com, pjt@...gle.com, luto@...capital.net,
efault@....de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] cpuset: Enable cpuset controller in default
hierarchy
On 03/20/2018 05:14 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 04:53:37PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> ASAIK for v2, when cpuset.cpus is empty, cpuset.effective_cpus will show
>> all the cpus available from the parent. It is a different behavior from
>> v1. So do we still need a cpuset.cpus_available?
> Heh, you're right. Let's forget about available and do
> cpuset.cpus.effective. The primary reason for suggesting that was
> because of the similarity with cgroup.controllers and
> cgroup.subtree_control; however, they're that way because
> subtree_control is delegatable. For a normal resource knob like
> cpuset.cpus, the knob is owned by the parent and what's interesting to
> the parent is its effective set that it's distributing from.
OK, will change the names as suggested.
-Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists