[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101122192106.GD15350@tango.0pointer.de>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 20:21:06 +0100
From: Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>
To: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ben Gamari <bgamari.foss@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, tytso@....edu,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, debiandev@...il.com,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, dhaval.giani@...il.com, efault@....de,
vgoyal@...hat.com, oleg@...hat.com, markus@...ppelsdorf.de,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups
On Mon, 22.11.10 11:54, Balbir Singh (balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
>
> * Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de> [2010-11-20 16:41:01]:
>
> > On Sat, 20.11.10 09:55, Balbir Singh (balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> >
> > > > However, I am not sure I like the idea of having pollable files like that,
> > > > because in the systemd case I am very much interested in getting
> > > > recursive notifications, i.e. I want to register once for getting
> > > > notifications for a full subtree instead of having to register for each
> > > > cgroup individually.
> > > >
> > > > My personal favourite solution would be to get a netlink msg when a
> > > > cgroup runs empty. That way multiple programs could listen to the events
> > > > at the same time, and we'd have an easy way to subscribe to a whole
> > > > hierarchy of groups.
> > >
> > > The netlink message should not be hard to do if we agree to work on
> > > it. The largest objections I've heard is that netlink implies
> > > network programming and most users want to be able to script in
> > > their automation and network scripting is hard.
> >
> > Well, the notify_on_release stuff cannot be dropped anyway at this point
> > in time, so netlink support would be an addition to, not a replacement for
> > the current stuff that might be useful for scripting folks.
>
> Agreed, we still need the old notify_on_release. Are you suggesting
> that for scripting we use the old interface and newer tools use
> netlink?
No, the contrary. I was referring to "the current stuff that might be
useful for scripting and folks". And then netlink stuff would be for
everything beyond scripting, but not scripting itself.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
--
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