On Nov 12, 2007 11:59 PM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thinking of it more, this requirement to "group tasks for only accounting
> purpose" may be required for other resources (mem, io, network etc) as well?
> Should we have a generic accounting controller which can provide the
On Nov 12, 2007 11:48 PM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Regarding your concern about tracking cpu usage in different ways, it
> could be mitigated if we have cpuacct controller track usage as per
> information present in a task's sched entity structure
> (tsk->se.sum_exec_runtim
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 12:59:59PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> Paul Menage wrote:
> > On Nov 12, 2007 11:00 PM, Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Right now, one of the limitations of the CPU controller is that
> >> the moment you create another control group, the bandwidth gets
> >> div
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 10:05:24PM -0800, Paul Menage wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 10:00 PM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On second thoughts, this may be a usefull controller of its own.
> > Say I just want to "monitor" usage (for accounting purpose) of a group of
> > tasks
On Nov 12, 2007 11:29 PM, Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think it's a good hack, but not sure about the complexity to implement
> the code. I worry that if the number of tasks increase (say run into
> thousands for one or more groups and a few groups have just a few
> tasks), we'll l
Paul Menage wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 11:00 PM, Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Right now, one of the limitations of the CPU controller is that
>> the moment you create another control group, the bandwidth gets
>> divided by the default number of shares. We can't create groups
>> just for
On Nov 12, 2007 11:00 PM, Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Right now, one of the limitations of the CPU controller is that
> the moment you create another control group, the bandwidth gets
> divided by the default number of shares. We can't create groups
> just for monitoring.
Could we
Paul Menage wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 10:00 PM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On second thoughts, this may be a usefull controller of its own.
>> Say I just want to "monitor" usage (for accounting purpose) of a group of
>> tasks, but don't want to control their cpu consump
On Nov 12, 2007 10:00 PM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On second thoughts, this may be a usefull controller of its own.
> Say I just want to "monitor" usage (for accounting purpose) of a group of
> tasks, but don't want to control their cpu consumption, then cpuacct
> con
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 09:25:32PM -0800, Paul Menage wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> Please can you revert commit 62d0df64065e7c135d0002f069444fbdfc64768f,
> entitled "Task Control Groups: example CPU accounting subsystem" ?
Hi Paul,
On second thoughts, this may be a usefull controller of its own
Hi Linus,
Please can you revert commit 62d0df64065e7c135d0002f069444fbdfc64768f,
entitled "Task Control Groups: example CPU accounting subsystem" ?
This was originally intended as a simple initial example of how to
create a control groups subsystem; it wasn't intended for mainline,
but I didn't m
11 matches
Mail list logo
