From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: [PATCHSET for-4.11] cgroup: implement cgroup v2 thread mode Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 06:28:50 +0100 Message-ID: <1486963730.5912.89.camel@gmx.de> References: <20170202200632.13992-1-tj@kernel.org> <20170209144704.GD6515@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Paul Turner , Peter Zijlstra Cc: Tejun Heo , "lizefan@huawei.com" , Johannes Weiner , Ingo Molnar , Andy Lutomirski , cgroups , LKML , kernel-team , "lvenanci@redhat.com" , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton On Sun, 2017-02-12 at 13:16 -0800, Paul Turner wrote: > > > On Thursday, February 9, 2017, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:07:16AM -0800, Paul Turner wrote: > > > The only case that this does not support vs ".threads" would be some > > > hybrid where we co-mingle threads from different processes (with the > > > processes belonging to the same node in the hierarchy). I'm not aware > > > of any usage that looks like this. > > > > If I understand you right; this is a fairly common thing with RT where > > we would stuff all the !rt threads of the various processes in a 'misc' > > bucket. > > > > Similarly, it happens that we stuff the various rt threads of processes > > in a specific (shared) 'rt' bucket. > > > > So I would certainly not like to exclude that setup. > > > > Unless you're using rt groups I'm not sure this one really changes. > Whether the "misc" threads exist at the parent level or one below > should not matter. (with exclusive cpusets, a mask can exist at one and only one location)