From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH repost] sched: export sched_set/getaffinity to modules Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 12:45:59 +0200 Message-ID: <1280918759.1923.968.camel@laptop> References: <4C2CA5C5.4040402@kernel.org> <20100701144624.GA11171@redhat.com> <4C2CABF2.2020801@kernel.org> <1277996135.1917.198.camel@laptop> <4C2E2987.9040702@us.ibm.com> <1278094270.1917.288.camel@laptop> <20100702210637.GA12433@redhat.com> <20100726171230.GA27644@redhat.com> <1280166688.3375.5.camel@localhost> <20100726180834.GA26988@redhat.com> <20100727045534.GA4316@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: Oleg Nesterov , Sridhar Samudrala , Tejun Heo , Ingo Molnar , netdev , lkml , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton , Dmitri Vorobiev , Jiri Kosina , Thomas Gleixner , Andi Kleen To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100727045534.GA4316@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 07:55 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Peter, could you please indicate whether you think this is the way to > go, too? I really dislike it, as you indicated, you now want priority too.. It seems the problem is that we normally don't consider work done by kernel threads for user processes part of that process. I'm not sure what work you're doing, but I'm pretty sure there's similar things already in the kernel -- think about the work done by encryption threads for encrypted sockets and stuff. If you want proper containment of work caused by a process, I'd suggest you start by looking at curing the general problem, instead of special casing this one case.