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:   Fri, 2 Jul 2021 12:26:37 -1000
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To:     Hao Lee <haolee.swjtu@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Question] Do we need remote charging for cpu and cpuacct subsys?
Message-ID: <YN+Sne76dhKBzV/R@mtj.duckdns.org>
References: <60decdb6.1c69fb81.6130e.7642@mx.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <60decdb6.1c69fb81.6130e.7642@mx.google.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 08:26:27AM -0000, Hao Lee wrote:
> memcg currently has a remote charging mechanism that can charge usage to other
> memcg instead of the one the task belongs to.
> 
> In our environment, we need to account the cpu usage consumed by some kworkers
> to a specific cgroup. Thus, we want to introduce a remote-charging mechanism to
> cpu and cpuacct subsys in our kernel.
> 
> I want to know if the community has a plan to do this?
> What will the community approach look like?

Yeah, we need sth like this to account for cpu cycles spent in commont path
but caused by specific cgroups - e.g. memory reclaim, net packet rx and so
on. There were some mentions of needing somthing like that but haven't been
any patchsets or concrete efforts that I know of.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun