Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:09:35 -0700 | From | "Paul Menage" <> | Subject | Re: boot cgroup questions |
| |
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:53 PM, Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com> wrote: > It probably won't even affect your existing scripts since > they will be able to move tasks into another set just like they do now.
My boot scripts look in /dev/cpuset/tasks to find processes to move into the system cpuset. So that would break them.
> they will now have to unset it in the 'boot' set as well.
That can break existing userspace, so I presume PaulJ isn't in favour of this change.
> Otherwise since the > 'boot' set will be non-exclusive (cpus and mems) it should not really affect > anything.
Apart from other cpusets that *are* mem_exclusive or cpu_exclusive.
> So what's your concern with unconditional 'boot' cgroup/cpuset ?
The exclusivity problem, as above.
Which subsystems are you going to include in this boot hierarchy? Userspace is going to have to be aware of the fact that there's a cpusets hierarchy which might have to be dismantled if it wants to set up something different.
Paul
| |