Re: [PATCH RFC 2/5] cgroup: Add mechanism to register vendor specific DRM devices

[Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

Hello,

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 10:21:14PM +0000, Ho, Kenny wrote:
> By this reply, are you suggesting that vendor specific resources
> will never be acceptable to be managed under cgroup?  Let say a user

I wouldn't say never but whatever which gets included as a cgroup
controller should have clearly defined resource abstractions and the
control schemes around them including support for delegation.  AFAICS,
gpu side still seems to have a long way to go (and it's not clear
whether that's somewhere it will or needs to end up).

> want to have similar functionality as what cgroup is offering but to
> manage vendor specific resources, what would you suggest as a
> solution?  When you say keeping vendor specific resource regulation
> inside drm or specific drivers, do you mean we should replicate the
> cgroup infrastructure there or do you mean either drm or specific
> driver should query existing hierarchy (such as device or perhaps
> cpu) for the process organization information?
> 
> To put the questions in more concrete terms, let say a user wants to
> expose certain part of a gpu to a particular cgroup similar to the
> way selective cpu cores are exposed to a cgroup via cpuset, how
> should we go about enabling such functionality?

Do what the intel driver or bpf is doing?  It's not difficult to hook
into cgroup for identification purposes.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx