On Sun, 2017-02-12 at 13:16 -0800, Paul Turner wrote: > > > On Thursday, February 9, 2017, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:07:16AM -0800, Paul Turner wrote: > > > The only case that this does not support vs ".threads" would be some > > > hybrid where we co-mingle threads from different processes (with the > > > processes belonging to the same node in the hierarchy). I'm not aware > > > of any usage that looks like this. > > > > If I understand you right; this is a fairly common thing with RT where > > we would stuff all the !rt threads of the various processes in a 'misc' > > bucket. > > > > Similarly, it happens that we stuff the various rt threads of processes > > in a specific (shared) 'rt' bucket. > > > > So I would certainly not like to exclude that setup. > > > > Unless you're using rt groups I'm not sure this one really changes. > Whether the "misc" threads exist at the parent level or one below > should not matter. (with exclusive cpusets, a mask can exist at one and only one location) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
