linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 12/16] sched/core: uclamp: Extend CPU's cgroup controller

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 3 Jun 2019 13:29:29 +0100
From:   Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Steve Muckle <smuckle@...gle.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/16] sched/core: uclamp: Extend CPU's cgroup
 controller

On 31-May 08:35, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Patrick.
> 
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 10:44:55AM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote:

[...]

> For proportions (as opposed to weights), we use percentage rational
> numbers - e.g. 38.44 for 38.44%.  I have parser and doc update commits
> pending.  I'll put them on cgroup/for-5.3.

That's a point worth discussing with Peter, we already changed one
time from percentages to 1024 scale.

Utilization clamps are expressed as percentages by definition,
they are just expressed in a convenient 1024 scale which should not be
alien to people using those knobs.

If we wanna use a "more specific" name like uclamp.{min,max} then we
should probably also accept to use a "more specific" metric, don't we?

I personally like the [0..1024] range, but I guess that's really up to
you and Peter to agree upon.

> Thanks.
> 
> --
> tejun

Cheers,
Patrick

-- 
#include <best/regards.h>

Patrick Bellasi