Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753394AbXJWQmQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 12:42:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752048AbXJWQmD (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 12:42:03 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:52608 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751992AbXJWQmB (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 12:42:01 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: content-disposition:references; b=KUKohehvevF8qYizQeqzAzS753eoVN5J9j+IlNcYMbx6jApGL2xz5FevEm71/86ED EylU11/e2uHQnBEoyZ59A== Message-ID: <6599ad830710230941y5d175688ob3a4d9ac42ba8c8f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:41:49 -0700 From: "Paul Menage" To: vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] CFS CGroup: Report usage Cc: "Andrew Morton" , "Ingo Molnar" , "Srivatsa Vaddagiri" , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20071023164704.GE4667@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <471D4523.4040509@google.com> <20071023164704.GE4667@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1132 Lines: 27 On 10/23/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote: > > Adds a cpu.usage file to the CFS cgroup that reports CPU usage in > > milliseconds for that cgroup's tasks > > It would be nice to split this into user and sys time at some point. Sounds reasonable - but does CFS track this? > We have also received request to provide idle time for a > container/cgroup. The semantics of "idle time" for a cgroup on a shared system seem a bit fuzzy. How would you define it? Suppose you have two cgroups that would each want to use, say, 55% of a CPU - technically they should each be regarded as having 45% idle time, but if they run on a the same CPU the chances are that they will both always have some processes on their runqueue due to contention with the other group. So how would you measure the difference between this and a cgroup that really is trying to use 100%? Paul - 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/