From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [BUG] cpu controller can't provide fair CPU time for each group
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:48:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1257846518.4648.18.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AEF94E8.3030403@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 11:26 +0900, Miao Xie wrote:
> Hi, Peter.
>
> I found two problems about cpu controller:
> 1) cpu controller didn't provide fair CPU time to groups when the tasks
> attached into those groups were bound to the same logic CPU.
> 2) cpu controller didn't provide fair CPU time to groups when shares of
> each group <= 2 * nr_cpus.
3) if you nest them too deep you're too going to see similar funnies.
Too sodding bad gcc messed up unsigned long long for LP64 mode, so we're
stuck with 64bit fixed point math where otherwise we could have used
128bit things.
Also, I don't really care much about fairness vs affinity, if you're
going to constrain the load-balancer and make his life impossible by
using affinities you get to keep the pieces.
But you've got a point, since you can probably see the same issue (1)
with cpusets, and that is because the whole cpu-controller vs cpusets
thing was done wrong.
Someone needs to fix that if they really care.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-10 9:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-03 2:26 [BUG] cpu controller can't provide fair CPU time for each group Miao Xie
2009-11-05 2:56 ` Miao Xie
2009-11-10 0:22 ` Andrew Morton
2009-11-10 9:48 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-11-11 6:21 ` Yasunori Goto
2009-11-11 7:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-11-11 9:59 ` Yasunori Goto
2009-11-11 20:39 ` Chris Friesen
2009-11-11 20:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-11-11 10:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-11-12 1:12 ` Yasunori Goto
2009-11-19 7:09 ` Yasunori Goto
2009-12-09 9:55 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: cgroup: Implement different treatment for idle shares tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
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=1257846518.4648.18.camel@twins \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox