From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 11/15] sched/core: uclamp: Extend CPU's cgroup controller Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 07:48:17 -0800 Message-ID: <20190214154817.GN50184@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> References: <20190208100554.32196-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> <20190208100554.32196-12-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190208100554.32196-12-patrick.bellasi@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick Bellasi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Vincent Guittot , Viresh Kumar , Paul Turner , Quentin Perret , Dietmar Eggemann , Morten Rasmussen , Juri Lelli , Todd Kjos , Joel Fernandes , Steve Muckle , Suren Baghdasaryan List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:05:50AM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > a) are available only for non-root nodes, both on default and legacy > hierarchies, while system wide clamps are defined by a generic > interface which does not depends on cgroups > > b) do not enforce any constraints and/or dependencies between the parent > and its child nodes, thus relying: > - on permission settings defined by the system management software, > to define if subgroups can configure their clamp values > - on the delegation model, to ensure that effective clamps are > updated to consider both subgroup requests and parent group > constraints I'm not sure about this hierarchical behavior. > c) have higher priority than task-specific clamps, defined via > sched_setattr(), thus allowing to control and restrict task requests and I have some other concerns about the interface, but let's discuss them once the !cgroup portion is settled. Thanks. -- tejun