Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched: Implement interface for cgroup unified hierarchy | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Tue, 27 Oct 2015 06:42:11 +0100 |
| |
On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 12:16 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Mike. > > On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 04:43:33AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > I don't think it's weird, it's just a thought wrt where pigeon holing > > could lead: If you filter out current users who do so in a manner you > > consider to be in some way odd, when all the filtering is done, you may > > find that you've filtered out the vast majority of current deployment. > > I think you misunderstood what I wrote. It's not about excluding > existing odd use cases. It's about examining the usages and > extracting the required capabilities and building an interface which > is well defined and blends well with the rest of programming interface > provided by the kernel so that those can be achieved in a saner way.
Sure, sounds fine, I just fervently hope that the below is foul swamp gas having nothing what so ever to do with your definition of "saner".
http://www.linuxfoundation.org/news-media/blogs/browse/2013/08/all-about-linux-kernel-cgroup%E2%80%99s-redesign
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ControlGroupInterface/
I'm not into begging. I really don't want to have to ask anyone to pretty please do for me what I can currently do all by my little self without having to give a rats ass less whether what I want to do fits in the world view of this or that obnoxious little control freak.
-Mike
| |