From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
To: vatsa@in.ibm.com, Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Herbert Poetzl <herbert@13thfloor.at>,
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
Mike Waychison <mikew@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 0/8] CFS Hard limits - v2
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:39:17 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AD466E5.4010206@openvz.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090930143953.GA2014@in.ibm.com>
> IMO Pavel's requirement can be met with a hard limit of 25%
>
> 2 CPU of 1GHz = (1/2 x 4) (1/2 x 2) GHz CPUs
> = 1/4 x 4 2GHz CPU
> = 25% of (4 2GHz CPU)
>
> IOW by hard-limiting a container thread to run just 0.5sec every sec on a 2GHz
> cpu, it is effectively making progress at the rate of 1GHz?
So, any suggestions on this? I'm not against the patches themselves.
I'm just trying to tell, that setting a cpulimit with 2 numbers is
not a good way to go (at least a clean explanation of how to calculate
them should go with the patches).
I propose to first collect what *can* be done. I see the following
possibilities:
1) two times (as it is now) - I believe this is inconvenient.
2) the amount in percents (like 50%) - this is how it works in
OpenVZ and customers are quite happy with it. It's better than
two numbers, since you need to specify only one clean number.
3) virtual cpu power in M/GHz - I don't agree with Balbir that
this is difficult for administrator. This is better than two
numbers and better that the percentage, since the amount of
cpu time got by a container will not change after migrating to
a more powerful CPU.
Thoughts?
> - vatsa
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-13 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-30 12:49 [RFC v2 PATCH 0/8] CFS Hard limits - v2 Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 12:50 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 1/8] sched: Rename sched_rt_period_mask() and use it in CFS also Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 12:51 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 2/8] sched: Maintain aggregated tasks count in cfs_rq at each hierarchy level Bharata B Rao
2009-10-13 14:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-14 3:42 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 12:52 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 3/8] sched: Bandwidth initialization for fair task groups Bharata B Rao
2009-10-13 14:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-14 3:49 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 12:52 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 4/8] sched: Enforce hard limits by throttling Bharata B Rao
2009-10-13 14:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-14 3:41 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-10-14 9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-14 11:50 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-10-14 13:18 ` Herbert Poetzl
2009-10-15 3:30 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 12:53 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 5/8] sched: Unthrottle the throttled tasks Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 12:54 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 6/8] sched: Add throttle time statistics to /proc/sched_debug Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 12:55 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 7/8] sched: Rebalance cfs runtimes Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 12:55 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 8/8] sched: Hard limits documentation Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 13:36 ` [RFC v2 PATCH 0/8] CFS Hard limits - v2 Pavel Emelyanov
2009-09-30 14:25 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-09-30 14:39 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2009-09-30 15:09 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2009-10-13 11:39 ` Pavel Emelyanov [this message]
2009-10-13 12:03 ` Herbert Poetzl
2009-10-13 12:19 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2009-10-13 12:30 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-10-13 12:45 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2009-10-13 12:56 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-10-13 12:57 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-10-13 13:01 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2009-10-13 14:56 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-10-13 22:02 ` Herbert Poetzl
2009-10-13 14:49 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-09-30 14:38 ` Balbir Singh
2009-09-30 15:10 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2009-09-30 15:30 ` Balbir Singh
2009-09-30 22:30 ` Herbert Poetzl
2009-10-01 5:12 ` Bharata B Rao
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=4AD466E5.4010206@openvz.org \
--to=xemul@openvz.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=herbert@13thfloor.at \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=mikew@google.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
/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