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
