From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] cpuset: Add cpuset.sched_load_balance to v2 Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 08:54:12 +0200 Message-ID: <1522133652.5996.2.camel@gmx.de> References: <1521649309-26690-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <1521649309-26690-3-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <20180322084120.GE7231@localhost.localdomain> <20180323075952.GA4763@localhost.localdomain> <20180326124711.GE5942@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Waiman Long , Juri Lelli Cc: Tejun Heo , Li Zefan , Johannes Weiner , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, pjt@google.com, luto@amacapital.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Roman Gushchin On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 16:28 -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > > The sched_load_balance flag isn't something that is passed to the > scheduler. It only only affects the CPU topology of the system. So I > suspect that a process in the root cgroup will be load balanced among > the CPUs in the one of the child cgroups. Yes, among CPUs that remain part of topology (and intersect affinity). > That doesn't look right unless > we enforce that no process can be in the root cgroup in this case. caveat: quite a few kthreads are nailed to the floor of root. -Mike From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on archive.lwn.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN, FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by archive.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 507877DD32 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 06:55:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751805AbeC0GzB (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2018 02:55:01 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:39801 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751349AbeC0GzA (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2018 02:55:00 -0400 Received: from homer.simpson.net ([185.221.149.147]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LaooK-1eGL4I0V8y-00kT4B; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 08:54:14 +0200 Message-ID: <1522133652.5996.2.camel@gmx.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] cpuset: Add cpuset.sched_load_balance to v2 From: Mike Galbraith To: Waiman Long , Juri Lelli Cc: Tejun Heo , Li Zefan , Johannes Weiner , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, pjt@google.com, luto@amacapital.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Roman Gushchin Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 08:54:12 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <1521649309-26690-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <1521649309-26690-3-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <20180322084120.GE7231@localhost.localdomain> <20180323075952.GA4763@localhost.localdomain> <20180326124711.GE5942@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:lAzZqiduz1T6QX/X1Q6FJGJzdkh4racHg7nUUGBygmjduwryX5D ZdxUtKhEeTGF0PfCx2ZfSjj2Hc0zARHh9qxFKuaOa1HL9HkHeLgRBQmp06l0SvnlM1DVMa2 3Q2X4/VFopsBT/hRZdKVY2GTAggUjwZOF3hptgSD+s2lYgnkqzy+SSkF2BhY5v1FKswipAO EIB/VWyMCXsuTayxIznIg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:dbIY+EfO/s8=:1OjkQvtOSaDELZ4d1ZFIrE dTgeWsGnwl8KC9q06Df0+Sch00f6feX8GRWfmIsy5ryfK6pXOOfcRfgVipDI2u63Y4hWkZoQ4 FzGdMlZKr0ky6DyCamPpUep6aAxSCb47m0ZBMFA+J6BVWhXwws4qsIp/iOtCt4GToPwaNUH5H yCwn2gl6H1ZVbTDTDYeBtVI/P0AhtIN2mIW7nZMabnKa2BHAhHqQtif7pxDsHSN0MYk1c0Zpy HFfTqA90inaHCrrEeEECO/MPW5bI7C+fyVC8Tp9NT4T7Q8CWquoCDeyk2O4WerO1/CTla58yt wHupw4P5unJkjgLkXn0lQQBnlvWLb9cLvRrprpkbUP7W4SWNdYnrKSrr5mBpwoPpN8mnL0vy4 ciTgjIayio3Hou8HTacN8yH2bRkVrNspX0o+hs48448rJdeB8ifT1v6mjiP3g6Tv+q0X2SA9J lr3zp/a/WX/paONXMBBgqBgvnNedJW4UBDuTRJ5inlSY+ciymA1qH0XwxiPxPacmLdZWIBiBl sH784yZTPObWhhlX1ZWHlDAYSkkrxMMTgeGBHpxKLXL7IDZLaqYlD/7jOFqwoDC6IOMcjZNem hLGdtzG89AvMkLiXR5jBM/IG7cHBQF3jMuWHQwCDUdmeuPO57NSxmqSsvCTpt1pdXhuIAXUar EGOpIPDnI5/QKyJpoppK9xas4KGQgsAPfAu7Tn8KF47C/vVfbNP5GEjmC+5RNBxsC/2qhiO7i JWHhQi5fUwPl5zT/yLrwo1628y9F2fb7MephzFqvBSfFPsoyC0w7usdiX2xbY8jfj9VUca9yA pWrYZW6XPIgxVeU2gb74ctsnoa2WgnTtoZKMAD8Q494C7DZBck= Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 16:28 -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > > The sched_load_balance flag isn't something that is passed to the > scheduler. It only only affects the CPU topology of the system. So I > suspect that a process in the root cgroup will be load balanced among > the CPUs in the one of the child cgroups. Yes, among CPUs that remain part of topology (and intersect affinity). > That doesn't look right unless > we enforce that no process can be in the root cgroup in this case. caveat: quite a few kthreads are nailed to the floor of root. -Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html