lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups
From
Date
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 12:49 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 00:43 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > What overhead? The implementation of cgroups is actually already
> > hierarchical.
>
> It must be nice to be that ignorant ;-) Speaking for the scheduler
> cgroup controller (that being the only one I actually know), most all
> the load-balance operations are O(n) in the number of active cgroups,
> and a lot of the cpu local schedule operations are O(d) where d is the
> depth of the cgroup tree.
>
> [ and that's with the .38 targeted code, current mainline is O(n ln(n))
> for load balancing and truly sucks on multi-socket ]
>
> You add a lot of pointer chasing to all the scheduler fast paths and
> there is quite significant data size bloat for even compiling with the
> controller enabled, let alone actually using the stuff.
>
> But sure, treat them as if they were free to use, I guess your machine
> is fast enough.

In general though, I think you can say that: cgroups ass overhead.
Simply because you add constraints, this means you need to 1) account
more, 2) enforce constraints. Both have definite non-zero cost in both
data and time.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-19 13:21    [W:0.202 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site