mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4.15-rc9] sched, cgroup: Don't reject lower cpu.max on ancestors
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 17:49:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180201164942.GC2249@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180130145639.GD1121507@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 06:56:39AM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 11:21:56AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > afaiu the existing code does exactly the opposite, it forces the
> > descendants to configure less than the parent allows.
> > 
> > You're taking out an error condition and silently allowing descentant
> > misconfiguration. How does that make sense?
> 
> Well, they're upper limits, not strict allocations.  The current
> behavior implemented by cpu isn't either a strict allocation or upper
> limits.  It disallows a child from having a value higher than the
> parent (allocation-ish) but the sum of the children is allowed to
> exceed the parent's (limit-ish).

True; but its still weird to have the parent 'promise' something and
then retract that 'promise' later.

> The combination is rather arbitrary and makes it impossible to
> delegate safely (a delegatee can block the delegator from reducing the
> amount resource allocated to the delegatee) while not really
> protecting against overcommit from descendants either.
> 
> We had this sort of input validations in different controllers all in
> their own ways.  In most cases, these aren't well thought out and we
> can't support things like delegation without aligning controller
> behaviors.

I suppose.. 

Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-01 16:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-22 19:26 Tejun Heo
2018-01-29 19:15 ` Tejun Heo
2018-01-30 10:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-01-30 14:56   ` Tejun Heo
2018-02-01 16:49     ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2018-02-01 19:57       ` Tejun Heo
2018-02-12 17:24 ` Tejun Heo

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=20180201164942.GC2249@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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

Powered by JetHome