From: Glauber Costa <glommer-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Paul Menage <paul-inf54ven1CmVyaH7bEyXVA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Aditya Kali <adityakali-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers-tD+1rO4QERM@public.gmane.org>,
Tim Hockin <thockin-Rl2oBbRerpQdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker
<fweisbec-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Containers
<containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Glauber Costa <glommer-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Andrew Morton
<akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] cgroups: Task counter subsystem v6
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:35:46 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EB2D0F2.40309@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALdu-PA2CDoeUMoNd1y44p_QzphX8J4s6NDcSyVC-rP1HGYwkA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
On 11/03/2011 03:28 PM, Paul Menage wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Glauber Costa<glommer-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> Sorry if I wasn't clear: It removes the need to walk multiple independent
>> hierarchies. The walk is done only once.
>
> You're talking about at fork time, and the concern is the cache
> footprint involved in walking up the parent pointer chain?
Yes, we can say this is my main concern.
> Isn't that an argument against multiple hierarchies (which is a
> decision for the admin), rather than against more subsystem
> flexibility?
Not always it is a decision for the admin. In most cases, it is a
constraint of the problem. For containers - take lxc as an example,
the most reasonable thing to do is to grab all cgroups subsystems
available, and contain them.
> If multiple subsystems on the same hierarchy each need to
> walk up the pointer chain on the same event, then after the first
> subsystem has done so the chain will be in cache for any subsequent
> walks from other subsystems.
No, it won't. Precisely because different subsystems have completely
independent pointer chains.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
To: Paul Menage <paul@paulmenage.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tim Hockin <thockin@hockin.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Aditya Kali <adityakali@google.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] cgroups: Task counter subsystem v6
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:35:46 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EB2D0F2.40309@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALdu-PA2CDoeUMoNd1y44p_QzphX8J4s6NDcSyVC-rP1HGYwkA@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/03/2011 03:28 PM, Paul Menage wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Glauber Costa<glommer@parallels.com> wrote:
>> Sorry if I wasn't clear: It removes the need to walk multiple independent
>> hierarchies. The walk is done only once.
>
> You're talking about at fork time, and the concern is the cache
> footprint involved in walking up the parent pointer chain?
Yes, we can say this is my main concern.
> Isn't that an argument against multiple hierarchies (which is a
> decision for the admin), rather than against more subsystem
> flexibility?
Not always it is a decision for the admin. In most cases, it is a
constraint of the problem. For containers - take lxc as an example,
the most reasonable thing to do is to grab all cgroups subsystems
available, and contain them.
> If multiple subsystems on the same hierarchy each need to
> walk up the pointer chain on the same event, then after the first
> subsystem has done so the chain will be in cache for any subsequent
> walks from other subsystems.
No, it won't. Precisely because different subsystems have completely
independent pointer chains.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-03 17:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-03 19:07 [PATCH 00/10] cgroups: Task counter subsystem v6 Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 01/10] cgroups: Add res_counter_write_u64() API Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-04 0:17 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2011-10-11 13:44 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 02/10] cgroups: New resource counter inheritance API Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-04 0:20 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 03/10] cgroups: Add previous cgroup in can_attach_task/attach_task callbacks Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-04 0:22 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 04/10] cgroups: New cancel_attach_task subsystem callback Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-04 0:27 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 05/10] cgroups: Ability to stop res charge propagation on bounded ancestor Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-04 0:41 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 06/10] cgroups: Add res counter common ancestor searching Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 07/10] res_counter: Allow charge failure pointer to be null Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-04 1:30 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 08/10] cgroups: Pull up res counter charge failure interpretation to caller Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-04 1:32 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 09/10] cgroups: Allow subsystems to cancel a fork Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-04 1:38 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2011-10-03 19:07 ` [PATCH 10/10] cgroups: Add a task counter subsystem Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-06 9:23 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2011-10-11 13:41 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-04 22:01 ` [PATCH 00/10] cgroups: Task counter subsystem v6 Andrew Morton
2011-10-11 13:40 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-25 20:06 ` Tim Hockin
[not found] ` <CAAAKZwu67VMiZgdpp=i5p7zyGbOHGHXwF_iprufGPzTLkkUF2A-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2011-10-28 23:30 ` Andrew Morton
2011-10-28 23:30 ` Andrew Morton
[not found] ` <20111028163021.1ce61f8a.akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
2011-10-29 9:38 ` Glauber Costa
2011-10-29 9:38 ` Glauber Costa
[not found] ` <CAA6-i6o0SPfZJDx4SRR1hY-He0L6zHuv0saH6EaE7Mrc2HF6PA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-03 16:49 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-11-03 16:49 ` Frederic Weisbecker
[not found] ` <20111103164917.GF8198-oHC15RC7JGTpAmv0O++HtFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-03 16:58 ` Glauber Costa
2011-11-03 16:58 ` Glauber Costa
[not found] ` <4EB2C852.6020706-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-03 17:02 ` Paul Menage
2011-11-03 17:02 ` Paul Menage
[not found] ` <CALdu-PDY8zpXYM3V9KRk4f2NyGevfNnuaWVdoT-qzSHOK--K3A-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-03 17:06 ` Glauber Costa
2011-11-03 17:06 ` Glauber Costa
[not found] ` <4EB2CA03.7030601-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-03 17:28 ` Paul Menage
2011-11-03 17:28 ` Paul Menage
[not found] ` <CALdu-PA2CDoeUMoNd1y44p_QzphX8J4s6NDcSyVC-rP1HGYwkA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-03 17:35 ` Glauber Costa [this message]
2011-11-03 17:35 ` Glauber Costa
[not found] ` <4EB2D0F2.40309-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-03 17:56 ` Paul Menage
2011-11-03 17:56 ` Paul Menage
[not found] ` <CALdu-PDbJ69FayXSd-kjAMX8AKEroZytPapxsUn8GFsz-z1omQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-04 13:17 ` Glauber Costa
2011-11-04 13:17 ` Glauber Costa
2011-11-03 17:00 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-11-03 17:00 ` Frederic Weisbecker
[not found] ` <20111103170038.GG8198-oHC15RC7JGTpAmv0O++HtFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-04 2:57 ` Li Zefan
2011-11-04 2:57 ` Li Zefan
2011-11-04 12:37 ` Frederic Weisbecker
[not found] ` <4EB3549D.5090404-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2011-11-04 12:37 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-10-06 6:51 ` Li Zefan
2011-10-11 13:41 ` Frederic Weisbecker
[not found] ` <1317668832-10784-1-git-send-email-fweisbec-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2011-12-13 15:58 ` Tejun Heo
2011-12-13 15:58 ` Tejun Heo
[not found] ` <20111213155848.GI25802-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2011-12-13 19:06 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-12-13 19:06 ` Frederic Weisbecker
[not found] ` <20111213190642.GB2421-oHC15RC7JGTpAmv0O++HtFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2011-12-13 20:49 ` Tejun Heo
2011-12-13 20:49 ` Tejun Heo
[not found] ` <20111213204918.GK25802-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2011-12-14 15:07 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-12-14 15:07 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=4EB2D0F2.40309@parallels.com \
--to=glommer-bzqdu9zft3wakbo8gow8eq@public.gmane.org \
--cc=adityakali-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org \
--cc=containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=fweisbec-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=glommer-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=kay.sievers-tD+1rO4QERM@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=oleg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=paul-inf54ven1CmVyaH7bEyXVA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=pjt-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=thockin-Rl2oBbRerpQdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.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.