On 10.10.2018 21:37, Phil Auld wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 10:49:25AM -0700 bseg...@google.com wrote:
Ingo Molnar writes:
I've Cc:-ed a handful of gents who worked on CFS bandwidth details to widen the
discussion.
Patch quoted below.
Looks like a real bug that needs to be fixed - and at
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 10:49:25AM -0700 bseg...@google.com wrote:
> Ingo Molnar writes:
>
> > I've Cc:-ed a handful of gents who worked on CFS bandwidth details to widen
> > the discussion.
> > Patch quoted below.
> >
> > Looks like a real bug that needs to be fixed - and at first sight the qu
Ingo Molnar writes:
> I've Cc:-ed a handful of gents who worked on CFS bandwidth details to widen
> the discussion.
> Patch quoted below.
>
> Looks like a real bug that needs to be fixed - and at first sight the quota
> of 1000 looks very
> low - could we improve the arithmetics perhaps?
>
>
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 10:32:44AM +0200 Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> I've Cc:-ed a handful of gents who worked on CFS bandwidth details to widen
> the discussion.
> Patch quoted below.
>
> Looks like a real bug that needs to be fixed - and at first sight the quota
> of 1000 looks very
> low
I've Cc:-ed a handful of gents who worked on CFS bandwidth details to widen the
discussion.
Patch quoted below.
Looks like a real bug that needs to be fixed - and at first sight the quota of
1000 looks very
low - could we improve the arithmetics perhaps?
A low quota of 1000 is used because
From: "Phil Auld"
sched/fair: Avoid throttle_list starvation with low cfs quota
With a very low cpu.cfs_quota_us setting, such as the minimum of 1000,
distribute_cfs_runtime may not empty the throttled_list before it runs
out of runtime to distribute. In that case, due to the change from
c06f
6 matches
Mail list logo
