Re: [PATCH 1/1, v9] cgroup/freezer: add per freezer duty ratiocontrol

[Jacob Pan]

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 19:23:21 -0800
Matt Helsley <matthltc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 04:38:12PM -0800, Jacob Pan wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 01:00:15 +0100
> > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > > Well, quite frankly, I'm not going to take this patch unless it
> > > gets an ACK from the scheduler people (which I'm guessing is not
> > > going to happen before hell freezes over).
> > > 
> > > IOW, please find a better way to address the issue at hand.
> > > 
> > We do have a real need that there is no exist feature in the kernel
> > can provide solution for. You want ACK from scheduler people
> > because it has impact on disabling irq? or you think scheduler
> > should be the one that provide the solution. I did try cpu
> > subsystem, but it seems to be limited to RT and certain scheduling
> > policy e.g. RR and FIFO.
> 
> I agree with Rafael. I think the scheduler should provide the solution
> and it can be done via modifications to the cpu cgroup subsystem. 
> Yes, it only has the shares and rt-related files *right now*. However,
> Kame replied earlier with a link to some patches for extending it
> that introduce files with similar (granted: not the same) semantics:
> 
> http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2010-10/msg04335.html
> 
> I think you could build on that and help push those patches towards
> mainline along with your enhancements for reducing wakeups rather
> than modify the freezer cgroup subsystem.
>
I will give CFS bandwidth control patches a try. See if I can be any
help. Thanks.

Jacob
--
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/