[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120312223113.GB18359@tango.0pointer.de>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 23:31:14 +0100
From: Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFD] cgroup: about multiple hierarchies
On Mon, 12.03.12 15:28, Tejun Heo (tj@...nel.org) wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:22:18PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 15:10 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > >
> > > * How to map controllers which aren't aware of full hierarchy is still
> > > an open question but I'm still standing by one active node on any
> > > root-to-leaf path w/ root group serving as the special rest group.
> >
> > What does this mean?
>
> Let's say we have a tree like the following.
>
> root
> / | \
> G1 G2 G3
> / \
> G31 G32
>
> So, for cgroups which don't support full hierarchy, it'll be viewed as
> either,
>
> root
> / | \
> G1 G2 G3
>
> or
>
> root
> / | | \
> G1 G2 G31 G32
>
> With root being treated specially, probably as just being a equal
> group as other groups, I'm not fully determined about that yet.
Note that at least systemd places all services by default beneath a
single "super" group (/system/), hence the first suggestion would make
little sense for us. The second suggestion would be fine however.
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