From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756488Ab1JQQeZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:34:25 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:59963 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753487Ab1JQQeX convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:34:23 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH, v10 3/3] cgroups: introduce timer slack controller From: Peter Zijlstra To: Alan Cox Cc: Matthew Garrett , Thomas Gleixner , Arjan van de Ven , Lennart Poettering , Andrew Morton , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Paul Menage , Li Zefan , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matt Helsley , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Kay Sievers , harald@redhat.com, david@fubar.dk, greg@kroah.com Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 18:33:59 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20111017164839.3887ee3e@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> References: <1318837019.6594.29.camel@twins> <20111017124647.GA12838@srcf.ucam.org> <1318856786.4172.22.camel@twins> <20111017141147.GA14581@srcf.ucam.org> <1318861707.4172.32.camel@twins> <20111017144013.GA15447@srcf.ucam.org> <1318862969.4172.45.camel@twins> <20111017145952.GB15769@srcf.ucam.org> <1318864260.4172.54.camel@twins> <20111017151920.GA16664@srcf.ucam.org> <1318864870.4172.61.camel@twins> <20111017164839.3887ee3e@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.3- Message-ID: <1318869239.4172.64.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2011-10-17 at 16:48 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > Hard enforcement is very much better than papering over because it makes > > the individual developer instantly aware that he's got a problem. > > Not always > > If you do weird container crap with timers than app authors will simply > point out that the weird container crap is buggy as it works properly in > a normal environment. Oh agreed. I never said the hard enforcement would/should rely on container crap. I'm very much in favour of a machine that's fully functional with a CGROUP=n kernel, thank you very much. Sadly a number of (userspace) wankers (some included on this thread) seem hell bent on making that impossible.