Re: [PATCH v2 14/14] Change CPUACCT to default n

[Li Zefan]

> despite it being a not entirely natural fit.  Something I proposed at
> Prague and that we could explore here is the idea of a co-mounted
> controller.  In this example it would only be mountable with cpu so
> you could always depend on the cpu hierarchy being there; likewise we
> can put (jump-labeled) touchpoints within the cpu-subsystem to call
> out for updates as appropriate when the co-mount exists.
> 

IIUC, this co-mounting idea is something I implemented years ago:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2008/6/18/389

The use case and the reason it was rejected:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2008/7/1/97

--
Li Zefan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/