lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [May]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCHSET cgroup/for-3.15] cgroup: implement unified hierarchy
From
On 5/2/14, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 04:27:51PM +0530, Raghavendra KT wrote:
[...]
>> Because all the way along, though we have freedom to make the cpusets
>> exclusive and move tasks (say VMs) into them,
>> making sure they do not interfere with each other, we can not prevent
>> the other tasks spawned in a system eating into cpus of
>> exclusive cpuset since they go to root automatically.
>
> I believe the right thing to do would be starting / confining other
> tasks in the appropriate non-root cgroups. cgroup already provides
> mechanisms to achieve that. The rest is upto userland.
>

Thanks Tejun for the reply. I agree.

>> Do you think having a knob, to make sure new tasks spawned go to say a
>> default directory under root makes sense?
>>
>> I understand that we could easily have a userspace script which could
>> achieve intended goal, but kernel solution
>> would really make the exclusive cpusets have exclusive access to cpus
>> it should have.
>
> This would just be a more reliable implementation of an ad-hoc
> mechanism when it can already be properly achieved by managing cgroups
> of all processes in the system.

Correct. Perhaps your answer clears my dilemma to go for a userspace
since I donot have any strong reason except convenience to go for a
kernel solution.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-05-05 19:01    [W:0.066 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site