-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 08/26/2010 01:18 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 01:04:33PM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote: >> >> I don't know. My goal with sandbox was to allow users to startup >> sandboxes in such a way that they could be still killed. >> >> Is there a way in cgroups to say >> >> dwalsh gets 80% CPU >> Then allow dwalsh to specify sandboxes can only use 80% of His CPU. So >> he can kill them. > > You can't directly specify absolute CPU%. You can only set relative > prioritization between groups via the 'cpu_shares' tunable. A group > with double the 'cpu_shares' value will get twice as much running > time from the schedular. If you know all groups at a particular > level of the hierarchy you can calculate the relative shares > required to give the absolute 80% value, but it gets increasingly > "fun" to calculate as you add more groups/shares :-) > > eg with 2 cgroups > > group1: cpu_shares=1024 (20%) > group2: cpu_shares=4096 (80%) > > With 3 groups > > group1: cpu_shares=512 (10%) > group2: cpu_shares=512 (10%) > group3: cpu_shares=4096 (80%) > > Or with 3 groups > > group1: cpu_shares=342 (6.66%) > group1: cpu_shares=682 (13.34%) > group2: cpu_shares=4096 (80%) > > > > Regards, > Daniel Seems we have a new hammer and everyone is looking to use. So far systemd, sandbox, libvirt and chrome-sandbox are using it. Which probably is not going to get the results we want. Since systemd goal might be to make sure no user uses more then X% of memory/CPU/ or setup CPU afinity. But sandbox and chrome-sandbox might allow you to use more. Which is why I think the kernel needs to allow nesting of cgroups. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkx2tf8ACgkQrlYvE4MpobOkwQCfW9kf/HOHpx+KR6BnMET33BQa YR4AoK5klVU2EVKVPEjojz9LQZYfU7TQ =uaSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
