lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-12 04:11    [W:0.083 / U:1.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site