On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:34:43AM +0800, Michael wang wrote: > During our testing, we found that the cpu.shares doesn't work as > expected, the testing is: >
/me zaps all the kvm nonsense as that's non reproducable and only serves to annoy. Pro-tip: never use kvm to report cpu-cgroup issues. > So is this results expected (I really do not think so...)? > > Or that imply the cpu-cgroup got some issue to be fixed? So what I did (WSM-EP 2x6x2): mount none /cgroup -t cgroup -o cpu mkdir -p /cgroup/a mkdir -p /cgroup/b mkdir -p /cgroup/c echo $$ > /cgroup/a/tasks ; for ((i=0; i<12; i++)) ; do A.sh & done echo $$ > /cgroup/b/tasks ; for ((i=0; i<12; i++)) ; do B.sh & done echo $$ > /cgroup/c/tasks ; for ((i=0; i<12; i++)) ; do C.sh & done echo 2048 > /cgroup/c/cpu.shares Where [ABC].sh are spinners: --- #!/bin/bash while :; do :; done --- for i in A B C ; do ps -deo pcpu,cmd | grep "${i}\.sh" | awk '{t += $1} END {print t}' ; done 639.7 629.8 1127.4 That is of course not perfect, but it's close enough. Now you again.. :-)
pgpAi1nMi4uyC.pgp
Description: PGP signature