[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180327140259.GN1840639@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 07:02:59 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, 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 v6 2/2] cpuset: Add cpuset.sched_load_balance to v2
Hello,
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 04:28:49PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> Maybe we can have a different root level flag, say,
> sched_partition_domain that is equivalent to !sched_load_balnace.
> However, I am still not sure if we should enforce that no task should be
> in the root cgroup when the flag is set.
>
> Tejun and Peter, what are your thoughts on this?
I haven't looked into the other issues too much but we for sure cannot
empty the root cgroup.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists