From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752296AbcEPM0w (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 May 2016 08:26:52 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:35702 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751146AbcEPM0v (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 May 2016 08:26:51 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 14:26:45 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Konstantin Khlebnikov Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] sched/fair: cpu time reserves for cgroups Message-ID: <20160516122645.GO3193@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <146339085068.25295.7687045977863852568.stgit@buzz> <20160516111849.GN3193@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <5739BB7E.8010902@yandex-team.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5739BB7E.8010902@yandex-team.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 03:22:22PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > >You forgot to explain why I should care about this. > > As I told this works as low-limit or high-limit which allow to > control cpu time distribution without hard limits and throttling. That's what it does; I get that. However nothing tells me why I should care about it. IOW, its a solution without a problem, and I tend to ignore those -- saves a lot of time on my end. > Present quota/hard limit has well known problems when it throttle task > inside kernel where it holds mutexes. Also it's too strict and doesn't > allow utilization of unused cpu time. See; now you're starting to make sense. You cannot have a patch if you don't have a problem. And this series didn't have a problem to solve. As for the latter; that's a feature for many people I'm told.