lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC 0/5] forced comounts for cgroups.
From
Date
On Wed, 2012-09-05 at 13:12 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On 09/05/2012 01:11 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, Peter.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 11:06:33AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> *confused* I always thought that was exactly what you meant with unified
> >> hierarchy.
> >
> > No, I never counted out differing granularity.
> >
>
> Can you elaborate on which interface do you envision to make it work?
> They will clearly be mounted in the same hierarchy, or as said
> alternatively, comounted.
>
> If you can turn them on/off on a per-subtree basis, which interface
> exactly do you propose for that?

I wouldn't, screw that. That would result in the exact same problem
we're trying to fix. I want a single hierarchy walk, that's expensive
enough.

> Would a pair of cgroup core files like available_controllers and
> current_controllers are a lot of drivers do, suffice?

No.. its not a 'feature' I care to support for 'my' controllers.

I simply don't want to have to do two (or more) hierarchy walks for
accounting on every schedule event, all that pointer chasing is stupidly
expensive.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-05 12:43    [W:0.121 / U:0.680 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site