Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Nov 2010 20:21:06 +0100 | From | Lennart Poettering <> | Subject | Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups |
| |
On Mon, 22.11.10 11:54, Balbir Singh (balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> > * Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@0pointer.de> [2010-11-20 16:41:01]: > > > On Sat, 20.11.10 09:55, Balbir Singh (balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote: > > > > > > However, I am not sure I like the idea of having pollable files like that, > > > > because in the systemd case I am very much interested in getting > > > > recursive notifications, i.e. I want to register once for getting > > > > notifications for a full subtree instead of having to register for each > > > > cgroup individually. > > > > > > > > My personal favourite solution would be to get a netlink msg when a > > > > cgroup runs empty. That way multiple programs could listen to the events > > > > at the same time, and we'd have an easy way to subscribe to a whole > > > > hierarchy of groups. > > > > > > The netlink message should not be hard to do if we agree to work on > > > it. The largest objections I've heard is that netlink implies > > > network programming and most users want to be able to script in > > > their automation and network scripting is hard. > > > > Well, the notify_on_release stuff cannot be dropped anyway at this point > > in time, so netlink support would be an addition to, not a replacement for > > the current stuff that might be useful for scripting folks. > > Agreed, we still need the old notify_on_release. Are you suggesting > that for scripting we use the old interface and newer tools use > netlink?
No, the contrary. I was referring to "the current stuff that might be useful for scripting and folks". And then netlink stuff would be for everything beyond scripting, but not scripting itself.
Lennart
-- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
| |