* [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management @ 2008-10-21 2:54 Dong-Jae Kang 2008-10-24 11:47 ` Balbir Singh 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Dong-Jae Kang @ 2008-10-21 2:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xen-devel, containers, linux-kernel, virtualization, dm-devel, corsetproject Hi, all These days, I am interested in green IT area for low power OS So, I have a question about it. Is there any good idea or comments about power management related with cgroup based resource management? I have no idea about that, but it seems to be possible to find a good concept. And I hope so Is it some strange question? ^^ Regards, Dong-Jae Kang ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management 2008-10-21 2:54 [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management Dong-Jae Kang @ 2008-10-24 11:47 ` Balbir Singh 2008-10-24 12:24 ` Dong-Jae Kang 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Balbir Singh @ 2008-10-24 11:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dong-Jae Kang Cc: xen-devel, containers, linux-kernel, virtualization, dm-devel, corsetproject, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan Dong-Jae Kang wrote: > Hi, all > > These days, I am interested in green IT area for low power OS > So, I have a question about it. > Is there any good idea or comments about power management related with > cgroup based resource management? > I have no idea about that, but it seems to be possible to find a good concept. > And I hope so > Is it some strange question? ^^ lesswatts.org, linux-pm (mailing list) are good sources on Power Management. I would recommend asking at those mailing lists (there are several new features like range timers, no idle hertz, sched_mc consolidation and much more). Could you be specific about what you are looking for? Are you looking at Server/Desktop power management? -- Balbir ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management 2008-10-24 11:47 ` Balbir Singh @ 2008-10-24 12:24 ` Dong-Jae Kang 2008-10-24 23:25 ` Matthew Garrett 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Dong-Jae Kang @ 2008-10-24 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: balbir Cc: xen-devel, containers, linux-kernel, virtualization, dm-devel, corsetproject, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan Hi, Balbir Singh 2008/10/24 Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>: > Dong-Jae Kang wrote: >> Hi, all >> >> These days, I am interested in green IT area for low power OS >> So, I have a question about it. >> Is there any good idea or comments about power management related with >> cgroup based resource management? >> I have no idea about that, but it seems to be possible to find a good concept. >> And I hope so >> Is it some strange question? ^^ > > lesswatts.org, linux-pm (mailing list) are good sources on Power Management. I > would recommend asking at those mailing lists (there are several new features > like range timers, no idle hertz, sched_mc consolidation and much more). Could > you be specific about what you are looking for? Are you looking at > Server/Desktop power management? > Thank you very much for your kind recommendation.^^ this site information will be helpful for me. As your recommendation, I will try to contact to lesswatts.org, linux-pm (mailing list) I am interested in power management in server side. and I just wonder this question, "Is there any related point between cgroup framework and power management?" Thanks again Regards, Dong-Jae Kang ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management 2008-10-24 12:24 ` Dong-Jae Kang @ 2008-10-24 23:25 ` Matthew Garrett 2008-10-25 8:05 ` Dong-Jae Kang 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Matthew Garrett @ 2008-10-24 23:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dong-Jae Kang Cc: balbir, xen-devel, containers, linux-kernel, virtualization, dm-devel, corsetproject, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 09:24:21PM +0900, Dong-Jae Kang wrote: > I am interested in power management in server side. > and I just wonder this question, "Is there any related point between > cgroup framework and power management?" Not currently, though it would certainly be possible to use cgroups as a mechanism for providing application-specific power management. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management 2008-10-24 23:25 ` Matthew Garrett @ 2008-10-25 8:05 ` Dong-Jae Kang 2008-10-25 15:43 ` Paul Menage 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Dong-Jae Kang @ 2008-10-25 8:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthew Garrett Cc: balbir, xen-devel, containers, linux-kernel, virtualization, dm-devel, corsetproject, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan Thank you for your positive opinion about my question I also hope cgroup framework has good point related with power management I think I need more re-consideration for it. ^^ How do you think about cgroup based management of new HW devices, for example, SSD, NVRAM and so on. Is there any requirement for it ? and is there any required work for it? I didn't seriously consider about that until now.^^ so I don't have cool idea but, I think it is worthy to find new domain to be applied by existing technology thank you. Best Regards, Dong-Jae Kang 2008/10/25 Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 09:24:21PM +0900, Dong-Jae Kang wrote: > >> I am interested in power management in server side. >> and I just wonder this question, "Is there any related point between >> cgroup framework and power management?" > > Not currently, though it would certainly be possible to use cgroups as a > mechanism for providing application-specific power management. > > -- > Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DONG-JAE, KANG Senior Member of Engineering Staff Internet Platform Research Dept, S/W Content Research Lab Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute(ETRI) 138 Gajeongno, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-700 KOREA Phone : 82-42-860-1561 Fax : 82-42-860-6699 Mobile : 82-10-9919-2353 E-mail : djkang@etri.re.kr (MSN) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management 2008-10-25 8:05 ` Dong-Jae Kang @ 2008-10-25 15:43 ` Paul Menage 2008-10-26 7:54 ` Dong-Jae Kang 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Paul Menage @ 2008-10-25 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dong-Jae Kang Cc: Matthew Garrett, balbir, xen-devel, containers, linux-kernel, virtualization, dm-devel, corsetproject, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 1:05 AM, Dong-Jae Kang <baramsori72@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you for your positive opinion about my question > > I also hope cgroup framework has good point related with power management > I think I need more re-consideration for it. ^^ > > How do you think about cgroup based management of new HW devices, for > example, SSD, NVRAM and so on. > Is there any requirement for it ? > and is there any required work for it? > I didn't seriously consider about that until now.^^ so I don't have cool idea > but, I think it is worthy to find new domain to be applied by existing > technology Control Groups is just a framework for associating state with (user-created) groups of processes. So if you have a problem to solve that involves tracking state for different processes, or applying different behaviour to groups of processes based on that group's state, then cgroups may well be an appropriate tool. In the case you mention (management of new devices) that's already somewhat covered by the existing device isolation subsystem - you can create a cgroup that has (or doesn't have) access to particular HW devices. Paul ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management 2008-10-25 15:43 ` Paul Menage @ 2008-10-26 7:54 ` Dong-Jae Kang 2008-10-26 8:21 ` Paul Menage 2008-10-27 2:34 ` MinChan Kim 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Dong-Jae Kang @ 2008-10-26 7:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paul Menage Cc: Matthew Garrett, balbir, xen-devel, containers, linux-kernel, virtualization, dm-devel, corsetproject, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan Hi, Paul Menage Thank you for your comments > Control Groups is just a framework for associating state with > (user-created) groups of processes. So if you have a problem to solve > that involves tracking state for different processes, or applying > different behaviour to groups of processes based on that group's > state, then cgroups may well be an appropriate tool. > > In the case you mention (management of new devices) that's already > somewhat covered by the existing device isolation subsystem - you can > create a cgroup that has (or doesn't have) access to particular HW > devices. > In some aspect, your opinion is right. Existing controller(ex. disk IO controllers) can be run on new HW devices(ex. SSD), existing block layer and so on. but, what I mean is that such controllers can support more performance if the controllers are rewrited with reconsideration of the features of new HW devices. in other words, what I mean can be optimization of controllers for new devices For example, In case of SSD, current IO scheduler layer is needed ? although i can not sure about it ^^ or process sleep is needed after throwing the IO requests to storage ? the role of page cache in SSD or NVRAM is less important than in normal HDD and .... I heard that many research centers in comanies and universities have studied about smiliar research of course, it can be OS itself, device drivers, block layer, file systems and memory management Under this trend, I just wonder whether the trend can be reflected to cgroup based controllers or not. and whether it is meaningful or not? How do you think about this? My opinion may be some humble ^^ Thank you -- Best Regards, Dong-Jae Kang ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management 2008-10-26 7:54 ` Dong-Jae Kang @ 2008-10-26 8:21 ` Paul Menage 2008-10-27 2:34 ` MinChan Kim 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Paul Menage @ 2008-10-26 8:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dong-Jae Kang Cc: Matthew Garrett, balbir, xen-devel, containers, linux-kernel, virtualization, dm-devel, corsetproject, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:54 AM, Dong-Jae Kang <baramsori72@gmail.com> wrote: > > Under this trend, > I just wonder whether the trend can be reflected to cgroup based > controllers or not. Potentially, but I'm not sure that anyone is looking at the kind of thing that you're describing. Feel free to post a design for it if you have some concrete ideas. Paul ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management 2008-10-26 7:54 ` Dong-Jae Kang 2008-10-26 8:21 ` Paul Menage @ 2008-10-27 2:34 ` MinChan Kim 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: MinChan Kim @ 2008-10-27 2:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dong-Jae Kang Cc: Paul Menage, Matthew Garrett, balbir, xen-devel, containers, linux-kernel, virtualization, dm-devel, corsetproject, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan Hi, Dong-Jae. > In some aspect, your opinion is right. > Existing controller(ex. disk IO controllers) can be run on new HW > devices(ex. SSD), existing block layer and so on. > > but, what I mean is that such controllers can support more performance > if the controllers are rewrited with reconsideration of the features > of new HW devices. in other words, what I mean can be optimization of > controllers for new devices > For example, > In case of SSD, current IO scheduler layer is needed ? although i can > not sure about it ^^ > or process sleep is needed after throwing the IO requests to storage ? > the role of page cache in SSD or NVRAM is less important than in > normal HDD and .... What you mention is already included in 2.6.28 merge window. I think we can use this feature on NVRAM, too. http://lwn.net/Articles/303270/ > I heard that many research centers in comanies and universities have > studied about smiliar research > of course, it can be OS itself, device drivers, block layer, file > systems and memory management > > Under this trend, > I just wonder whether the trend can be reflected to cgroup based > controllers or not. > and whether it is meaningful or not? > How do you think about this? > My opinion may be some humble ^^ I think it's not cgroup controller's role but each subsystem's one. As you can see above article, Many mainline guys try to improve performance in each subsystems. Do you have a scenario or idea how to use cgroup frame work to manage devices like NVRAM, SSD ?? > Thank you > -- > Best Regards, > Dong-Jae Kang > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > -- Kinds regards, MinChan Kim ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-10-27 2:34 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2008-10-21 2:54 [Question] power management related with cgroup based resource management Dong-Jae Kang 2008-10-24 11:47 ` Balbir Singh 2008-10-24 12:24 ` Dong-Jae Kang 2008-10-24 23:25 ` Matthew Garrett 2008-10-25 8:05 ` Dong-Jae Kang 2008-10-25 15:43 ` Paul Menage 2008-10-26 7:54 ` Dong-Jae Kang 2008-10-26 8:21 ` Paul Menage 2008-10-27 2:34 ` MinChan Kim
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox