Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752489AbbHDTD2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Aug 2015 15:03:28 -0400 Received: from mail-yk0-f181.google.com ([209.85.160.181]:34272 "EHLO mail-yk0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751073AbbHDTD1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Aug 2015 15:03:27 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 15:03:24 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Vikas Shivappa Cc: Vikas Shivappa , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, matt.fleming@intel.com, will.auld@intel.com, glenn.p.williamson@intel.com, kanaka.d.juvva@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] x86/intel_rdt: Add new cgroup and Class of service management Message-ID: <20150804190324.GH17598@mtj.duckdns.org> References: <1435789270-27010-1-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com> <1435789270-27010-6-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com> <20150730194458.GD3504@mtj.duckdns.org> <20150802163157.GB32599@mtj.duckdns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1350 Lines: 31 Hello, Vikas. On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 11:50:16AM -0700, Vikas Shivappa wrote: > I will make this more clear in the documentation - We intend this cgroup > interface to be used by a root or superuser - more like a system > administrator being able to control the allocation of the threads , the one > who has the knowledge of the usage and being able to decide. I get that this would be an easier "bolt-on" solution but isn't a good solution by itself in the long term. As I wrote multiple times before, this is a really bad programmable interface. Unless you're sure that this doesn't have to be programmable for threads of an individual applications, this is a pretty bad interface by itself. > There is already a lot of such usage among different enterprise users at > Intel/google/cisco etc who have been testing the patches posted to lkml and > academically there is plenty of usage as well. I mean, that's the tool you gave them. Of course they'd be using it but I suspect most of them would do fine with a programmable interface too. Again, please think of cpu affinity. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/