[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210820010403.946838-2-joshdon@google.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2021 20:47:02 +0800
From: alexs@...nel.org
To: alexs@...nel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Oleg Rombakh <olegrom@...gle.com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Steve Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] sched: cgroup SCHED_IDLE support
...
> For now, we maintain the existing SCHED_IDLE semantics. Future patches
> may make improvements that extend how we treat SCHED_IDLE entities.
>
> The per-task_group idle field is an integer that currently only holds
> either a 0 or a 1. This is explicitly typed as an integer to allow for
> further extensions to this API. For example, a negative value may
> indicate a highly latency-sensitive cgroup that should be preferred for
> preemption/placement/etc.
Hi Josh,
Sounds there is a ready solutions for colocation problem, isn't there?
I'd like to evaluate its effects if it could be sent out.
Thanks
Alex
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists