From: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@gmail.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Herbert Poetzl <herbert@13thfloor.at>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
Nikhil Rao <ncrao@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Waychison <mikew@google.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] CFS Bandwidth Control
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:48:18 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100216061818.GB3492@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100213025417.23325.90048.stgit@kitami.corp.google.com>
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 06:54:52PM -0800, Paul Turner wrote:
> Todo:
> -----
> - hierarchal nr_tasks_running accounting:
> This is a deficiency currently shared with SCHED_RT rate limiting. When
> entities is throttled the running tasks it owns are not subtracted from
> rq->nr_running. This then results in us missing idle_balance() due to
> phantom tasks and load balancer weight per task calculations being
> incorrect.
>
> This code adds complexity which was both increasing the complexity of the
> initial review for this patchset and truly probably best reviewed
> independently of this feature's scope. To that end we'll post a separate
> patch for this issue against the current RT rate-limiting code and merge any
> converged on approach here as appropriate.
I had tried updating rq->nr_running in my v2 patchset
(http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/30/117, http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/30/119)
But since I felt that it added a lot of complexity, I removed it
subsequently in v3 (http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/11/9/65) and kept it similar
to RT.
>
> - throttle statistics:
> Some statistics regarding the frequency and duration of throttling
> definitely in order.
Please take a look at some of the throttling related stats I am collecting
in my patchset.
Regards,
Bharata.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-16 6:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-13 2:54 [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] CFS Bandwidth Control Paul Turner
2010-02-13 2:54 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] sched: introduce primitives to account for CFS bandwidth tracking Paul
2010-02-25 8:14 ` Bharata B Rao
2010-02-25 10:30 ` Paul Turner
2010-02-26 11:52 ` Bharata B Rao
2010-02-13 2:55 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/4] sched: accumulate per-cfs_rq cpu usage Paul
2010-02-13 2:55 ` [RFC PATCH v1 3/4] sched: throttle cfs_rq entities which exceed their local quota Paul
2010-02-13 2:55 ` [RFC PATCH v1 4/4] sched: unthrottle cfs_rq(s) who ran out of quota at period refresh Paul
2010-02-16 5:39 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] CFS Bandwidth Control Bharata B Rao
2010-02-16 6:18 ` Bharata B Rao [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100216061818.GB3492@in.ibm.com \
--to=bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=dhaval.giani@gmail.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=herbert@13thfloor.at \
--cc=kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=mikew@google.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=ncrao@google.com \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.