Re: [RFC v5 PATCH 0/8] CFS Hard limits - v5

[Bharata B Rao]

On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 11:13:42PM -0800, Paul Turner wrote:
> 
> I'm really glad that we're having this discussion however it feels
> like we are rat-holing a little on the handling of slack?  As an issue

That's because runtime rebalancing was one of the main the issues you
brought up.

> it seems a non-starter since if necessary it can be scrubbed with the
> same overhead as the original proposal for period refresh (i.e. remove
> slack from each cpu).  There are also trivial faster ways to zero it
> without this O(n) overhead.
> 
> I feel it would be more productive to focus discussion on other areas
> of design such as load balancer interaction, distribution from global
> to local pools, entity placement and fairness on wakeup, etc.

Sure, as I said looking forward to your patches!
Discussions/reviews on those aspects were hardly forthcoming during
my earlier posts. Hopefully we will see more review/discussions in future.

> 
> > Regards,
> > Bharata.
> >
--
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/