From: Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Relax a restriction in sched_rt_can_attach()
Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 17:11:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <554737AE.5040402@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1430717964.3129.62.camel@gmail.com>
>>> Some degree of flexibility is provided so that you may disable some controllers
>>> in a subtree. For example:
>>>
>>> root ---> child1
>>> (cpuset,memory,cpu) (cpuset,memory)
>>> \
>>> \-> child2
>>> (cpu)
>>
>> Whew, that's a relief. Thanks.
>
> But somehow I'm not feeling a whole lot better.
>
> "May" means if you don't explicitly take some action to disable group
> scheduling, you get it (I don't care if I have an off button), but that
> would also seemingly mean that we would then have rt tasks in taskgroups
> with no bandwidth allocated, ie you have to make group scheduling for rt
> tasks meaningless until a bandwidth appeared, and to make bandwidth
> appear, you'd have to stop the world, distribute, continue, no?
>
> The current "just say no" seems a lot more sensible.
>
I just realized we allow removing/adding controllers from/to cgroups
while there are tasks in them, which isn't safe unless we eliminate all
can_attach callbacks. We've done so for some cgroup subsystems, but
there are still a few of them...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-04 10:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-04 0:54 Zefan Li
2015-05-04 3:13 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-04 4:39 ` Zefan Li
2015-05-04 5:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-04 5:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-04 9:11 ` Zefan Li [this message]
2015-05-04 12:08 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-04 12:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-04 14:09 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-05 3:46 ` Zefan Li
2015-05-05 6:02 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-05-05 3:54 ` Zefan Li
2015-05-05 14:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 14:18 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 15:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 16:31 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 19:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 19:06 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-06 8:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 14:41 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 15:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 16:13 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 16:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-05 18:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-05-05 19:00 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-06 9:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-05-05 18:31 ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-05 14:09 ` 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=554737AE.5040402@huawei.com \
--to=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.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
Powered by JetHome