From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@nortel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Yasunori Goto <y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>,
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: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:39:37 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AFB2109.8010708@nortel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1257924007.23203.18.camel@twins>
On 11/11/2009 01:20 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 15:21 +0900, Yasunori Goto wrote:
>
>> When users use cpuset/cpu affinity, then they would like to controll cpu affinity.
>> Not CPU time.
>
> What are people using affinity for? The only use of affinity is to
> restrict or disable the load-balancer. Don't complain the load-balancer
> doesn't work when you're taking active steps to hinder its work.
I have one active user of scheduler groups (using CKRM though, but they
want to switch to a new kernel using CFS and sched groups in the near
future).
They want to run their app on one cpu by itself with as little
interference as possible. Pure cpu processing, not even any I/O except
via shared memory buffers. Everything else gets done on the other cpu,
but they want to control how much of the other cpu is assigned to packet
processing, how much to system maintenance, normal user shell commands, etc.
This would seem like a case where some sort of cpuset/affinity and
sched groups would be expected to play nice together.
Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-11 20:41 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
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 [this message]
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=4AFB2109.8010708@nortel.com \
--to=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=y-goto@jp.fujitsu.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