Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755287Ab0LDXnr (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Dec 2010 18:43:47 -0500 Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:38482 "EHLO mail-wy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753830Ab0LDXnq (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Dec 2010 18:43:46 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=pJpb+wPIV3AuiNO9yFaFmmQn3oUeGaP5UIjekuiaw9iKChdBORSXwPxmzWPZReOd+Y Yu7sTzY4QVYkeWWP0yoMLsxaXCombQQKGFR5IoGAv2VRrGSX+vYGwS/yYid+L1ZsW1mZ G0KW9wEDWMvSZcEUp5RIoDfCCbU51p4v5m3YM= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1289783580.495.58.camel@maggy.simson.net> <1289811438.2109.474.camel@laptop> <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> <20101116130413.GA29368@redhat.com> <1289917109.5169.131.camel@maggy.simson.net> <20101116150319.GA3475@redhat.com> <1289922108.5169.185.camel@maggy.simson.net> <20101116172804.GA9930@elte.hu> <1290281700.28711.9.camel@maggy.simson.net> Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 18:43:44 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: TM4SVri6U8ef8_8UaOd3tg3OEs4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] sched: automated per session task groups From: Colin Walters To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Mike Galbraith , Ingo Molnar , Oleg Nesterov , Peter Zijlstra , Markus Trippelsdorf , Mathieu Desnoyers , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1454 Lines: 31 On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > And it doesn't hurt you. If you're happy with "nice", go on and use > it. Why are you even discussing it? Because it seems to me like a bug if it isn't as good as group scheduling? Most of your message is saying it's worthless, and I don't disagree that it's not very good *right now*. I guess where we disagree is whether it's worth fixing. > What's your point again? It's a heuristic. So if it's a heuristic the OS can get wrong, wouldn't it be a good idea to support a way for programs and/or interactive users to explicitly specify things? Unfortunately the cgroups utilities don't make this easy (and of course there's the issue that no major released OS exports write permission to the cpu cgroup for a desktop session uid). I guess "nice" could be patched to, if the user has permission to the cgroups, to auto-create a group. Or...nice could be fixed. On a more productive note, I see now Documentation/scheduler/sched-nice-design.txt has a lot of really useful history regarding "nice" and the complaints over time (I guess this is where some of your assertions that it's failed/worthless comes from). -- 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/