Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched: Implement interface for cgroup unified hierarchy

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:24:42AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Paul Turner <pjt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > Anyways, a point here is that threads of the same process competing
> > > isn't a new problem.  There are many ways to make those threads play
> > > nice as the application itself often has to be involved anyway,
> > > especially for something like qemu which is heavily involved in
> > > provisioning resources.
> > 
> > It's certainly not a new problem, but it's a real one, and it's
> > _hard_.  You're proposing removing the best known solution.
> 
> Also, just to make sure this is resolved properly, I'm NAK-ing the current 
> scheduler bits in this series:
> 
>   NAKed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> until all of pjt's API design concerns are resolved. This is conceptual, it is not 
> a 'we can fix it later' detail.
> 
> Tejun, please keep me Cc:-ed to future versions of this series so that I can lift 
> the NAK if things get resolved.

You can add:

NAKed-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

to that.

There have been at least 3 different groups of people:

 - Mike, representing Suse customers
 - Kamezawa-san, representing Fujitsu customers
 - Paul, representing Google

that claim per-thread control groups are in use and important.

Any replacement _must_ provide for this use case up front; its not
something that can be cobbled on later.
--
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/