Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Sender: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Feb 2021 05:28:43 -0500
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To:     Odin Ugedal <odin@uged.al>
Cc:     changhuaixin@linux.alibaba.com, bsegall@google.com,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        mgorman@suse.de, mingo@redhat.com, pauld@redhead.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, pjt@google.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        shanpeic@linux.alibaba.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
        xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] sched/fair: Burstable CFS bandwidth controller
Message-ID: <YCJj21ftgxS5MrVB@slm.duckdns.org>
References: <20210121110453.18899-1-changhuaixin@linux.alibaba.com>
 <20210209131719.1193428-1-odin@uged.al>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210209131719.1193428-1-odin@uged.al>
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 02:17:19PM +0100, Odin Ugedal wrote:
> A am not that familiar how cross subsystem patches like these are handled, but
> I am still adding the Tejun Heo (cgroup maintainer) as a CC. Should maybe cc to
> cgroup@ as well?

Yeah, that'd be great. Given that it's mostly straight forward extension on
an existing interface, things looks fine from cgroup side; however, please
do add cgroup2 interface and documentation. One thing which has bene
bothersome about the bandwidth interface is that we're exposing
implementation details (window size and now burst size) instead of
usage-centric requirements but that boat has already sailed, so...

Thanks.

-- 
tejun