From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:28:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:28:28 -0400 Received: from [213.97.137.182] ([213.97.137.182]:59148 "HELO iceberg.activanet.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:28:15 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Eduardo =?iso-8859-1?q?Cort=E9s=20?= To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Re: limit cpu Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:28:27 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.1] In-Reply-To: <20010816162913Z271588-760+2494@vger.kernel.org> <0b7201c1267c$5c30b260$103147ab@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <0b7201c1267c$5c30b260$103147ab@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <20010816182820Z271606-760+2516@vger.kernel.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org If somebody want to develope it, a lot of thanks. I see scheduler could be better with this feature, opinions? On Thursday 16 August 2001 19:53, Hua Zhong wrote: > Current Linux scheduler doesn't seem to be able to support this nicely. > You can set their priorities..but the values are not very intuitive. And > if you sleep, the result could become very inaccurate. > > A new scheduler (sth like weighted round robin) is a more natural solution. > You just assign weights to processes and they will be scheduled > accordingly. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eduardo Cortés" > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:29 AM > Subject: Re: Re: limit cpu > > > On Thursday 16 August 2001 18:13, you wrote: > > > > > > i want to know if linux can limit the max cpu usage (not cpu > > > > > > time) per user, > > > > > > > > > > no. doing so would inherently slow down the scheduler. > > > > > > > > but *BSD has this feature, what's the problem in linux? > > > > > > I said that, thinking that it would require another test along > > > the scheduler's fast path. but if we only test when a process > > > has exhausted its quantum (or perhaps at counter-recalc), > > > the overhead would be minor. > > > > I think that it's a good feature for linux, but I don't know if is very > > complex to develope in linux. If I can limit the max cpu usage (in %) for > > an > > > user/group, the box is more solid.