Hello, On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 10:04:33AM -0400, Brian Welty wrote: > The patch series enables device drivers to use cgroups to control the > following resources within a GPU (or other accelerator device): > * control allocation of device memory (reuse of memcg) > and with future work, we could extend to: > * track and control share of GPU time (reuse of cpu/cpuacct) > * apply mask of allowed execution engines (reuse of cpusets) > > Instead of introducing a new cgroup subsystem for GPU devices, a new > framework is proposed to allow devices to register with existing cgroup > controllers, which creates per-device cgroup_subsys_state within the > cgroup. This gives device drivers their own private cgroup controls > (such as memory limits or other parameters) to be applied to device > resources instead of host system resources. > Device drivers (GPU or other) are then able to reuse the existing cgroup > controls, instead of inventing similar ones. I'm really skeptical about this approach. When creating resource controllers, I think what's the most important and challenging is establishing resource model - what resources are and how they can be distributed. This patchset is going the other way around - building out core infrastructure for bolierplates at a significant risk of mixing up resource models across different types of resources. IO controllers already implement per-device controls. I'd suggest following the same interface conventions and implementing a dedicated controller for the subsystem. Thanks. -- tejun
