[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALdu-PA2CDoeUMoNd1y44p_QzphX8J4s6NDcSyVC-rP1HGYwkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:28:00 -0700
From: Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tim Hockin <thockin@...kin.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Aditya Kali <adityakali@...gle.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] cgroups: Task counter subsystem v6
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com> wrote:
> Sorry if I wasn't clear: It removes the need to walk multiple independent
> hierarchies. The walk is done only once.
You're talking about at fork time, and the concern is the cache
footprint involved in walking up the parent pointer chain?
Isn't that an argument against multiple hierarchies (which is a
decision for the admin), rather than against more subsystem
flexibility? If multiple subsystems on the same hierarchy each need to
walk up the pointer chain on the same event, then after the first
subsystem has done so the chain will be in cache for any subsequent
walks from other subsystems.
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