On Nov 12, 2007 11:29 PM, Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
quoted text
>
> 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 lose out on accuracy.

But for the case we're looking at, you've already said that you don't
care much about actually controlling CPU, just monitoring it. So what
does it matter if the CPU sharing isn't perfectly accurate? I don't
think that you're painting a realistic scenario.

quoted text
>
> I think we already have the code, we need to make it more useful and
> reusable.

In that case we should take the existing cpu_acct code out of 2.6.24
until the API has been made more useful and reusable, so that we don't
have to support it for ever.

Paul
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/