From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hookup group-scheduler with task container infrastructure Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 21:21:19 +0530 Message-ID: <20070911155119.GE16222@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20070910171049.GA16048@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070910172334.GB19100@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070910102259.dc45a481.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070910174649.GA16222@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <6599ad830709101545s66fd338dob6932407db4e1002@mail.gmail.com> <46E641C1.8000808@fr.ibm.com> <20070911082243.9433c528.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> Reply-To: vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070911082243.9433c528.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Cedric Le Goater , Paul Menage , Dmitry Adamushko , Andrew Morton , ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.osdl.org, Jan Engelhardt , Ingo Molnar List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 08:22:43AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > That looks odd, like it's a filesystem. > What does cfs really mean? cfs = completely fair scheduler :) In this thread, we are talking of hooking the cfs cpu scheduler with the task-container framework in -mm tree, so that the scheduler can deal with groups of tasks rather than just tasks, while handling fairness of cpu allocation. I agree "cfs" control subsystem does look odd a bit here. "cpu" control subsystem seems better. -- Regards, vatsa