[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120816232010.GJ24861@google.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:20:10 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v0 5/5] cgroup: Assign subsystem IDs during compile time
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 04:12:16PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>
>
> We are able to safe some space when we assign the subsystem
> IDs at compile time. Instead of allocating per cgroup
> cgroup->subsys[CGROUP_SUBSYS_COUNT] where CGROUP_SUBSYS_COUNT is
> always 64, we allocate 12 + 1 at max (at this point there are 12
> subsystem).
So, IIUC, this is effectively removing the capability to implement
modularized controller which isn't known at kernel compile time. Am I
right?
I don't think that's a bad idea but if we're doing that, can't we make
things even simpler? Do we need to distinguish in-kernel and module
at all?
Li, what do you think about this?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists