From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, pjt@google.com,
luto@amacapital.net, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] cpuset: Enable cpuset controller in default hierarchy
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 18:06:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f0fca497-e4e7-3dbd-1e5c-a7f502c05dcb@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180309221736.GB5926@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 03/09/2018 05:17 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 03:43:34PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>> The isolcpus= parameter just reduce the cpus available to the rests of
>> the system. The cpuset controller does look at that value and make
>> adjustment accordingly, but it has no dependence on exclusive cpu/mem
>> features of cpuset.
> The isolcpus= boot param is donkey shit and needs to die. cpuset _used_
> to be able to fully replace it, but with the advent of cgroup 'feature'
> this got lost.
>
> And instead of fixing it, you're making it _far_ worse. You completely
> removed all the bits that allow repartitioning the scheduler domains.
>
> Mike is completely right, full NAK on any such approach.
So you are talking about sched_relax_domain_level and
sched_load_balance. I have not removed any bits. I just haven't exposed
them yet. It does seem like these 2 control knobs are useful from the
scheduling perspective. Do we also need cpu_exclusive or just the two
sched control knobs are enough?
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-09 23:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-09 15:35 [PATCH v4] cpuset: Enable cpuset controller in default hierarchy Waiman Long
2018-03-09 16:34 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 17:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 17:45 ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 18:17 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 18:20 ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 19:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-09 20:43 ` Waiman Long
2018-03-09 22:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-09 23:06 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2018-03-10 3:47 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-14 19:57 ` Tejun Heo
2018-03-15 2:49 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-19 15:34 ` Tejun Heo
2018-03-19 20:49 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-19 21:41 ` Waiman Long
2018-03-20 4:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2018-03-10 13:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-03-12 14:20 ` Waiman Long
2018-03-12 15:21 ` Mike Galbraith
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=f0fca497-e4e7-3dbd-1e5c-a7f502c05dcb@redhat.com \
--to=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).