On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 11:29 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
<snip>
> >> BUT: I remind you the talks at OKS/OLS and in previous UBC discussions.
> >> It was noted that having a separate interfaces for CPU, I/O bandwidth
> >>
> >
> > But, it will be lot simpler for the user to configure/use if they are
> > together. We should discuss this also.
> >
> IMHO such unification may only imply that one syscall is used to pass
> configuration info into kernel.
> Each controller has specific configurating parameters different from the
> other ones. E.g. CPU controller must assign a "weight" to each group to
> share CPU time accordingly, but what is a "weight" for memory controller?
> IO may operate on "bandwidth" and it's not clear what is a "bandwidth" in
> Kb/sec for CPU controller and so on.
CKRM/RG handles this by eliminating the units from the interface and
abstracting them to be "shares". Each resource controller converts the
shares to its own units and handles properly.
User can specify the quantities simply as a percentage. CPU controller
would treat it as cycles/ticks (within a time), memory controller would
treat it as number of pages, and I/O controller would treat it as
bandwidth, and so on...
<snip>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose....
- [email protected] | .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
