[RFC] CPU hard limits

Balbir Singh balbir at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Fri Jun 5 02:55:27 PDT 2009


* menage at google.com <menage at google.com> [2009-06-05 02:48:36]:

> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:36 AM, Balbir Singh<balbir at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > The important scenario I have is adding and removing groups.
> >
> > Consider 10 cgroups with shares of 10 each, what if 5 new are created
> > with the same shares? We now start getting 100/15, even though we did
> > not change our shares.
> 
> Are you assuming that arbitrary users can create new cgroups whenever
> they like, with whatever shares they like? In that situation, how
> would you use hard limits to provide guarantees? Presumably if the
> user could create a cgroup with an arbitrary share, they could create
> one with an arbitrary hard limit too.
>

What about applications running as root, that can create their own
groups? How about multiple instances of the same application started?
Do applications need to know that creating a group will hurt
guarantees provided to others?
 
> Can you explain a bit more about how you're envisaging cgroups being
> created, and how their shares and hard limits would get set? I was
> working on the assumption that (for any sub-tree of the CFS hierarchy)
> there's a single managing entity that gets to decide the shares given
> to the cgroups within that tree. That managing entity would be
> responsible for ensuring that the shares given out allowed guarantees
> to be met (or alternatively, that the probability of violating those
> guarantees based on the shares given out was within some tolerance
> threshold).
>

The point is that there is no single control entity for creating
groups. if run a solution, it might create groups without telling the
user. No one is arbitrating, not even libcgroup. What if someone
changes the cpuset assignment and moves CPUS x to y in an exclusive
cpuset all of a sudden. How do we arbitrate?

 
-- 
	Balbir


More information about the Containers mailing list