On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 10:12:51 -0800 Paul Menage <menage@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Jacob Pan > <jacob.jun.pan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I think this logic defeats the purpose of having timer_slack > > subsystem in the first place. IMHO, the original intention was to > > have grouping effect of tasks in the cgroup. > > You can get the semantics you want by just setting min_slack_ns = > max_slack_ns. > true. it will just make set fail when min = max. it is awkward and counter intuitive when you want to change the group timer_slack. you will have to move both min and max to clamp the value, where set function can not be used. In addition, when a parent changes min = max, I don't see the current code enforce new settings on the children. Am i missing something? In my use case, i want to put some apps into a managed group where relaxed slack value is used, but when time comes to move the app out of that cgroup, we would like to resore the original timer slack. I see having a current value per cgroup can be useful if we let timer code pick whether to use task slack value or the cgroup slack value. Or we have to cache the old value per task _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
