Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751957AbcKYWsc (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Nov 2016 17:48:32 -0500 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:56346 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750922AbcKYWsW (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Nov 2016 17:48:22 -0500 Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 23:48:16 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Cc: Mike Galbraith , Ingo Molnar , linux-man , lkml , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: RFC: documentation of the autogroup feature [v2] Message-ID: <20161125224816.GC3045@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1479901185.4306.38.camel@gmx.de> <327586fa-4672-d070-0ded-850654586273@gmail.com> <1479915229.4306.106.camel@gmx.de> <7513b0a5-c5d0-3a92-5849-995af22601e4@gmail.com> <1479921075.4306.153.camel@gmx.de> <1480078973.4075.58.camel@gmx.de> <20161125160456.GP3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22.1 (2013-10-16) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1120 Lines: 25 On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 05:33:23PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > Okay -- you're really quite the ASCII artist. And somehow, > I think you needed to compose the mail in LaTeX. But thanks > for the detail. It's helpful, for me at least. Hehe, its been a while since I did LaTeX, so I'd probably make a mess of it :-) Glad my ramblings made sense. > > Note that this property, where the weight of the server entity is > > independent from its child entities is a desired feature. Without that > > it would be impossible to control the relative weights of groups, and > > that is the sole parameter of the WFQ model. > > > > It is also why Linus so likes autogroups, each session competes equally > > amongst one another. > > I get it. But, the behavior changes for the process nice value are > undocumented, and they should be documented. I understand > what the behavior change was. But not yet when. Well, its all undocumented -- I suppose you're about to go fix that :-) But think of it differently, think of the group as a container, then the behaviour inside the container is exactly as expected.