Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751834AbZGRM6v (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jul 2009 08:58:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751704AbZGRM6t (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jul 2009 08:58:49 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:54465 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751604AbZGRM6s (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jul 2009 08:58:48 -0400 Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] sched: fix nr_uninterruptible accounting of frozen tasks really From: Peter Zijlstra To: Nathan Lynch Cc: Matt Helsley , Thomas Gleixner , LKML , Andrew Morton , Rafael Wysocki , Ingo Molnar , Nigel Cunningham , stable@kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org In-Reply-To: <1247864134.17553.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090717121545.489258927@linutronix.de> <20090717122103.225652146@linutronix.de> <1247833910.15751.61.camel@twins> <20090717152235.GA5878@count0.beaverton.ibm.com> <1247849254.6522.75.camel@laptop> <1247864134.17553.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 14:56:31 +0200 Message-Id: <1247921791.6597.5.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1674 Lines: 38 On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 15:55 -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote: > On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 18:47 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 08:22 -0700, Matt Helsley wrote: > > > > > The job scheduler in question does not use FROZEN as a transient state and > > > does not use checkpoint/restart at all since c/r is still a work in progress. > > Right, the job scheduler uses the cgroup freezer as a mechanism to > preempt a low priority job for a higher priority job. (It had used > SIGSTOP in the past.) So in this scenario a frozen cgroup may remain in > that state for a while. Load average is consulted as a measure of > system utilization. I think that this is an utterly broken use for it, if you want something like that make a signal cgroup or something and deliver SIGSTOP to all of them. In other words, why is the freezer any better than the SIGSTOP approach? > > > Even when used for power management it seems wrong to count frozen tasks > > > towards the loadavg since they aren't using CPU time or waiting for IO. > > > > You're abusing it for _WHAT_? > > I think Matt was referring to system-wide suspend/resume/hibernate, not > a behavior of the job scheduler, if that's your concern. I understood he referred to the crazy use-case you mentioned above, IMHO frozen should be a temporary state used for things like snapshot/migrate. I'm still very tempted to plain simply revert that original patch. -- 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/