[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180531104413.GH12180@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 12:44:13 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.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,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/7] cpuset: Add cpuset.sched.load_balance flag to v2
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 09:41:30AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt b/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt
> index e7534c5..681a809 100644
> --- a/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/cgroup-v2.txt
> @@ -1542,6 +1542,32 @@ Cpuset Interface Files
> Further changes made to "cpuset.cpus" is allowed as long as
> the first condition above is still true.
>
> + A parent scheduling domain root cgroup cannot distribute all
> + its CPUs to its child scheduling domain root cgroups
This I think wants to be in the previous patch
> unless
> + its load balancing flag is turned off.
And this is indeed for here.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists