Re: [PATCH 0/2] Traffic control cgroups subsystem

From: Ranjit Manomohan
Date: Wed Sep 10 2008 - 16:44:52 EST

On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 1:22 PM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I definitely prefer Thomas Graf's work, this stuff is very ugly
> and way overengineered.

Could you be more specific? Thomas' work is almost identical to this
(except that he does not store the cgroup id into the socket which is
a trivial change which has downsides which I have pointed out).

Additionally this approach has only minor modifications to the core
networking stack. What portions do you consider ugly and over
engineered and what alternative implementations would you prefer?
Please see the follow up I have sent to Thomas' proposal about why we
need this design approach to handle the inbound case.

I'd be ok if you accepted either change since we just want a standard
kernel mechanism to do this.


> So no, I won't consider for net-next-2.6, sorry.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at