Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 14 Feb 2019 07:48:17 -0800
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To:     Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@arm.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
        Steve Muckle <smuckle@google.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 11/15] sched/core: uclamp: Extend CPU's cgroup
 controller
Message-ID: <20190214154817.GN50184@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
References: <20190208100554.32196-1-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
 <20190208100554.32196-12-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190208100554.32196-12-patrick.bellasi@arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:05:50AM +0000, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> a) are available only for non-root nodes, both on default and legacy
>    hierarchies, while system wide clamps are defined by a generic
>    interface which does not depends on cgroups
> 
> b) do not enforce any constraints and/or dependencies between the parent
>    and its child nodes, thus relying:
>    - on permission settings defined by the system management software,
>      to define if subgroups can configure their clamp values
>    - on the delegation model, to ensure that effective clamps are
>      updated to consider both subgroup requests and parent group
>      constraints

I'm not sure about this hierarchical behavior.

> c) have higher priority than task-specific clamps, defined via
>    sched_setattr(), thus allowing to control and restrict task requests

and I have some other concerns about the interface, but let's discuss
them once the !cgroup portion is settled.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun