[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6599ad830802260058m28d8f46djc83f47e19e2946a7@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 00:58:06 -0800
From: "Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To: "Li Zefan" <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Hugh Dickins" <hugh@...itas.com>,
"Sudhir Kumar" <skumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"YAMAMOTO Takashi" <yamamoto@...inux.co.jp>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, taka@...inux.co.jp,
linux-mm@...ck.org, "David Rientjes" <rientjes@...gle.com>,
"Pavel Emelianov" <xemul@...nvz.org>,
"KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Memory Resource Controller Add Boot Option
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > - foo doesn't show up in /proc/cgroups
>
> Or we can print out the disable flag, maybe this will be better?
> Because we can distinguish from disabled and not compiled in from
>
> /proc/cgroups.
Certainly possible, if people felt it was useful.
>
> > - foo isn't auto-mounted if you mount all cgroups in a single hierarchy
> > - foo isn't visible as an individually mountable subsystem
>
> You mentioned in a previous mail if we mount a disabled subsystem we
> will get an error. Here we just ignore the mount option. Which makes
> more sense ?
>
No, we don't ignore the mount option - we give an error since it
doesn't refer to a valid subsystem. (And in the first case there is no
mount option).
Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists