lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements


On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Stephane Eranian wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:
>>> That's all nice and good, but I still have no coherent explanation why
>>> measuring across allocation domains makes sense.
>>
>> Is this in reaction to this one?
>>
>>>> 5) Put multiple threads into a single measurement group
>>
>> If we fix it to say "threads from the same CAT group" does it fix things?
>>
> Inside a CAT partition, there may be multiple tasks split into
> different cgroups.
> We need the ability to monitor groups of tasks individually within that CAT
> partition. I think this is what this bullet is about.
>

The #8 covers that I think (or what we intended for 5..) ?

8) Can get measurements for subsets of tasks in a CAT group (to find the
threads hogging the resources).

Thanks,
Vikas

>
>> We'd like to have measurement groups use a single RMID ... if we
>> allowed tasks from different CAT groups in the same measurement
>> group we wouldn't be able to split the numbers back to report the
>> right overall total for each of the CAT groups.
>>
>> -Tony
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-03-08 01:11    [W:0.139 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site