Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933052AbXINPtM (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:49:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752562AbXINPs6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:48:58 -0400 Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.153]:43334 "EHLO e35.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751829AbXINPs5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:48:57 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 21:29:13 +0530 From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Dmitry Adamushko , Andrew Morton , ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.osdl.org, Jan Engelhardt , dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, menage@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hookup group-scheduler with task container infrastructure Message-ID: <20070914155913.GA8751@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20070910172334.GB19100@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070910102259.dc45a481.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070910174649.GA16222@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070911044145.GC16222@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070912114202.GA30385@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070913123324.GA6214@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20070914094158.GA1990@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070914094158.GA1990@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2233 Lines: 49 On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 11:41:58AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote: > > Add interface to control cpu bandwidth allocation to task-groups. > > btw., just in case it was not obvious, i'll repeat my older assessment > of your patch: the general picture approach looks good to me and the > code is upstream-worthy. Thanks for the feedback! > ( suggestion: if you want more people to test it then you might want to > do some add-on "put all users into separate groups" patch and .config > option - which could be tried without people having to know anything > about container setup. ) I do want more people to test it and I agree that hooking onto user-id based groups is the best way to get that done. How do we implement that? I have two choices: 1. Do a kernel patch, as you suggest above, which defines task-groups based on user-id and hook that group definition with group scheduler. We need to provide some means for the admin to tune relative nice-value of each user (perhaps thr' sysctl?). This user-id based grouping will have to be mutually exclusive with task-container based grouping. Hence we need to ensure that only one form of grouping is selected and not both at compile time. 2. Enable only one form of grouping, which is task-container based. Provide a user-space daemon (attached) which can automatically put tasks of different users in different task-containers. The daemon will need to be started at early boot-time. It can also be extended to support a configuration file (ex: inittab) where cpu allocation for different users are specified. The fact that daemon is managing to provide fair allocation to users should be transparent. I hope that task-containers (aka cgroups) will go into 2.6.24, in which case the second option seems to be more attractive to me. I will neverthless try to work out Option 1, just to see how it looks. -- Regards, vatsa - 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/