Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] perf_events: add support for per-cpu per-cgroup monitoring (v3)

[Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>]

On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 10:04 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:

> That understanding is correct, but the whole approach sounds more
> complex due to several subsystems involved, the expectation is that
> we'll move perf to all the correct cgroups for each subsystem.

Well, we'll only move a completely dormant task to a cgroup and out
again.

> > > > If we were to fork a child that's simply sitting idle in waitpid() (or
> > > > any other blocking syscall) we can move that around cgroup without
> > > > affecting the cgroup itself.
> > > 
> > > But then things get a bit more complicated because the perf_event_open()
> > > has to be done in that child. File descriptors created in child processes
> > > and not shared with their parent. You'd have to pass file descriptors around.
> > > That seems overly complicated.
> > 
> > Uhm, no the trick is that the child remains absolutely dormant and
> > therefore doesn't accrue any accounting, all you need is a known task in
> > the cgroup, the parent can then specify the child pid to identify the
> > group.
> > 
> > Once you've opened the counter, you can move the kid out and kill it.
> > Note that moving it out of the cgroup before killing it ensure it never
> > wakes up inside that cgroup.
> 
> What the benefits of this complexity, not chaning perf_event_attr?

Yes, attach information should not be in _attr. And you avoid the hassle
of creating a special file and passing fds to it around.