lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC 3/5] sched: Add CPU rate hard caps
Kirill Korotaev wrote:
>>> Using a timer for releasing tasks from their sinbin sounds like a bit
>>> of an overhead. Given that there could be 10s of thousands of tasks.
>>
>>
>>
>> The more runnable tasks there are the less likely it is that any of
>> them is exceeding its hard cap due to normal competition for the
>> CPUs. So I think that it's unlikely that there will ever be a very
>> large number of tasks in the sinbin at the same time.
>
> for containers this can be untrue... :( actually even for 1000 tasks (I
> suppose this is the maximum in your case) it can slowdown significantly
> as well.

Do you have any documented requirements for container resource management?
Is there a minimum list of features and nice to have features for containers
as far as resource management is concerned?


>
>>> Is it possible to use the scheduler_tick() function take a look at all
>>> deactivated tasks (as efficiently as possible) and activate them when
>>> its time to activate them or just fold the functionality by defining a
>>> time quantum after which everyone is worken up. This time quantum
>>> could be the same as the time over which limits are honoured.
>
> agree with it.

Thinking a bit more along these lines, it would probably break O(1). But I guess a good
algorithm can amortize the cost.

>
> Kirill
>
--

Balbir Singh,
Linux Technology Center,
IBM Software Labs
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-05-31 18:07    [W:0.133 / U:1.624 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site