From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: [RFC] Add BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_IOCTL Date: Fri, 7 May 2021 10:59:38 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20201103210418.q7hddyl7rvdplike@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20201103232805.6uq4zg3gdvw2iiki@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ffwll.ch; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=/nh1bbQT5CiK8IqERbTeRh4gKwm6+O6Vg+VARq82rio=; b=ddP9vw2/xz6l5rgNknMnioGUpBwslhkhK/Vqn+Kl45rxtCUI1B37VPu4ncHEAzfh5G lraIDVUeYC1DCwyViD6+lq/nLpHJ7NVA4UnG4dIh03OPLcXFQHOCKIsy6MTCyG7IvMTN ggSkExoADblSOWRHwZ8hPSr4yuGq19xGJhDe8= Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Kenny Ho Cc: Daniel Vetter , Alexei Starovoitov , Dave Airlie , Kenny Ho , Alexander Viro , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , Andrii Nakryiko , John Fastabend , KP Singh , bpf , Network Development , Linux-Fsdevel , "open list:CONTROL GROUP (CGROUP)" , Alex Deucher , amd-gfx list , DRI Development On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 10:06:32PM -0400, Kenny Ho wrote: > Sorry for the late reply (I have been working on other stuff.) > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 8:49 AM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > So I agree that on one side CU mask can be used for low-level quality > > of service guarantees (like the CLOS cache stuff on intel cpus as an > > example), and that's going to be rather hw specific no matter what. > > > > But my understanding of AMD's plans here is that CU mask is the only > > thing you'll have to partition gpu usage in a multi-tenant environment > > - whether that's cloud or also whether that's containing apps to make > > sure the compositor can still draw the desktop (except for fullscreen > > ofc) doesn't really matter I think. > This is not correct. Even in the original cgroup proposal, it > supports both mask and count as a way to define unit(s) of sub-device. > For AMD, we already have SRIOV that supports GPU partitioning in a > time-sliced-of-a-whole-GPU fashion. Hm I missed that. I feel like time-sliced-of-a-whole gpu is the easier gpu cgroups controler to get started, since it's much closer to other cgroups that control bandwidth of some kind. Whether it's i/o bandwidth or compute bandwidht is kinda a wash. CU mask feels a lot more like an isolation/guaranteed forward progress kind of thing, and I suspect that's always going to be a lot more gpu hw specific than anything we can reasonably put into a general cgroups controller. Also for the time slice cgroups thing, can you pls give me pointers to these old patches that had it, and how it's done? I very obviously missed that part. Thanks, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch