Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757121Ab0KPS5M (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:57:12 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:44871 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756005Ab0KPS5L (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:57:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101116181603.GC19327@tango.0pointer.de> References: <1289820766.16406.45.camel@maggy.simson.net> <1289821590.16406.47.camel@maggy.simson.net> <20101115125716.GA22422@redhat.com> <1289856350.14719.135.camel@maggy.simson.net> <20101116015648.GA11534@redhat.com> <1289916171.5169.117.camel@maggy.simson.net> <1289916683.2109.625.camel@laptop> <20101116170312.GA19327@tango.0pointer.de> <20101116181603.GC19327@tango.0pointer.de> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 10:49:22 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups To: Lennart Poettering Cc: Dhaval Giani , Peter Zijlstra , Mike Galbraith , Vivek Goyal , Oleg Nesterov , Markus Trippelsdorf , Mathieu Desnoyers , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Balbir Singh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2173 Lines: 48 On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > Here's my super-complex patch btw, to achieve exactly the same thing > from userspace without involving any kernel or systemd patching and > kernel-side logic. Simply edit your own ~/.bashrc and add this to the end: Right. And that's basically how this "patch" was actually tested originally - by doing this by hand, without actually having a patch in hand. I told people: this seems to work really well. Mike made it work automatically. Because it's something we want to do it for all users, and for all shells, and make sure it gets done automatically. Including for users that have old distributions etc, and make it easy to do in one place. And then you do it for all the other heuristics we can see easily in the kernel. And then you do it magically without users even having to _notice_. Suddenly it doesn't seem that wonderful any more to play with bashrc, does it? That's the point. We can push out the kernel change, and everything will "just work". We can make that feature we already have in the kernel actually be _useful_. User-level configuration for something that should just work is annoying. We can do better. Put another way: if we find a better way to do something, we should _not_ say "well, if users want it, they can do this ". If it really is a better way to do something, we should just do it. Requiring user setup is _not_ a feature. Now, I'm not saying that we shouldn't allow users to use cgroups. Of course they can do things manually too. But we shouldn't require users to do silly things that we can more easily do ourselves. If the choice is between telling everybody "you should do this", and "we should just do this for you", I'll take the second one every time. We know it should be done. Why should we then tell somebody else to do it for us? Linus -- 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/