lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC 0/3] Introduce per-task latency_tolerance for scheduler hints
From
Date


On 12/5/19 7:33 PM, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 05/12/2019 11:49, Valentin Schneider wrote:
>>
>> On 05/12/2019 09:24, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>>> On 25/11/2019 10:46, Parth Shah wrote:
>>>> This patch series is based on the discussion started as the "Usecases for
>>>> the per-task latency-nice attribute"[1]
>>>>
>>>> This patch series introduces a new per-task attribute latency_tolerance to
>>>> provide the scheduler hints about the latency requirements of the task.
>>>
>>> I forgot but is there a chance to have this as a per-taskgroup attribute
>>> as well?
>>>
>>
>> Peter argued we should go for task attributes first, and then
>> cgroup/taskgroups later on:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190905083127.GA2332@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net/
>
> OK, I went through this thread again. So Google or we have to provide
> the missing per-taskgroup API via cpu controller's attributes (like for
> uclamp) for the EAS usecase.

I suppose many others (including myself) will also be interested in having
per-taskgroup attribute via CPU controller.

>
> After reading:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20190905114030.GL2349@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
>
> IMHO the following mapping of the existing Android (binary)
> latency_sensitive per-taskgroup flag makes sense:
>
> latency_sensitive=1 -> latency_tolerance*[-20 .. -1] (less tolerant,
> more sensitive)
>
> latency_sensitive=0 -> latency_tolerance[0 .. 19] (more tolerant, less
> sensitive)
>
> Default value is 0 so not latency_sensitive.
>
> * Since we use [-20 .. 19] as values for latency_tolerance we could name
> it latency_nice. It's shorter ... ?

I kept choosing appropriate name and possible values for this new attribute
in the separate thread. https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/30/215
From which discussion, looking at Patrick's comment
https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/18/678 I thought of picking latency_tolerance
as the appropriate name.
Still will be happy to change as per the community needs.

Thanks,
parth

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-05 18:14    [W:0.053 / U:2.648 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site