On Wed, 26.03.14 00:12, WaLyong Cho (walyong....@samsung.com) wrote: > > On 03/25/2014 05:01 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Tue, 25.03.14 01:03, WaLyong Cho (walyong....@samsung.com) wrote: > > > >> /* Figure out which controllers we need */ > >> > >> - if (c->cpu_accounting || c->cpu_shares != 1024) > >> + if (c->cpu_accounting || > >> + c->startup_cpu_shares != 1024 || > >> + (manager_state(m) != MANAGER_STARTING && c->cpu_shares != > >> 1024)) > > > > This looks incorrect. Shouldn't it be like this: > > > > ... > > > > if (c->cpu_accounting || > > (manager->state(m) == MANAGER_STARTING ? c->startup_cpu_shares : > > c->cpu_shares) != 1024) > > > > At previous patch, I also wrote similar with your thought. Assume, some > of units just only specified StartupCPUShares=(or > StartupBlockIOWeight=). In this case, that unit will not be changed to > default weight because global state is already changed to running. So I > put startup_cpu_shares condition alone.
No sure I understand. The service processes should be removed from the CPU cgroup as soon as the global state reaches RUNNING if only CPUShares= is set, but StartupCPUShares= isn't? Hence the startup cpu shares value should not have an effect anymore. Am I missing something? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
