Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups

From: Mike Galbraith
Date: Fri Nov 19 2010 - 08:04:02 EST


On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 13:51 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 04:31 -0800, Paul Menage wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > It must be nice to be that ignorant ;-) Speaking for the scheduler
> > > cgroup controller (that being the only one I actually know), most all
> > > the load-balance operations are O(n) in the number of active cgroups,
> > > and a lot of the cpu local schedule operations are O(d) where d is the
> > > depth of the cgroup tree.
> >
> > The same would apply to CPU autogroups, presumably?
>
> Yep, they're not special at all... uses the same mechanism.

The only difference is cost of creation and destruction, so cgroups and
autogroups suck boulders of slightly different diameter when creating
and/or destroying at high frequency.

-Mike


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/