From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759232AbXGKJFN (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 05:05:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760165AbXGKJEv (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 05:04:51 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:60616 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757774AbXGKJEu (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 05:04:50 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:04:23 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andrew Morton Cc: vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Paul Menage , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.osdl.org Subject: Re: containers (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) Message-ID: <20070711090423.GA6758@elte.hu> References: <20070710013152.ef2cd200.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070710105240.GA20914@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <6599ad830707101134k29951c45h4af0807603f52b76@mail.gmail.com> <20070710115319.0bdaff34.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070711045516.GH2927@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070710222942.382fc9ba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070710222942.382fc9ba.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.1.7-deb -1.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andrew Morton wrote: > > c. Enable group scheduling bits only in -mm for now (2.6.23-mmX), using > > Paul's container patches. I can send you a short patch that hooks up > > cfs group scheduler with Paul's container infrastructure. > > > > If a. is not possible, I would prefer c. > > > > Let me know your thoughts .. > > I'm inclined to take the cautious route here - I don't think people > will be dying for the CFS thingy (which I didn't even know about?) in > .23, and it's rather a lot of infrastructure to add for a CPU > scheduler configurator gadget (what does it do, anyway?) > > We have plenty of stuff for 2.6.23 already ;) > > Is this liveable with?? another option would be to trivially hook up CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED with cpusets, and to offer CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED in the Kconfig, dependent on CPUSETS and defaulting to off. That would give it a chance to be tested, benchmarked, etc. Ingo