Re: [PATCH REPOST RFC cgroup/for-3.7] cgroup: mark subsystems withbroken hierarchy support and whine if cgroups are nested for them
From: Michal Hocko
Date: Thu Sep 13 2012 - 13:40:05 EST
On Thu 13-09-12 10:18:32, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Michal.
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 02:14:38PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > I would like to see use_hierarchy go away. The only concern I have is
> > to warn only if somebody is doing something wrong (aka flat
> > hierarchies). Or better put it this way. Do not warn in cases which do
> > not change if use_hierarchy is gone or default changes to 1.
> > An example:
> > root (use_hierarchy=0)
> > | \
> > | A (use_hierarchy=0)
> > |
> > B (use_hierarachy=1)
> > |\
> > C D
> > is a perfectly sane configuration and I do not see any reason to fill
> > logs with some scary warnings when A is created. There will be no
> > semantical change in this setup When use_hierchy is gone.
> > So the only thing I am proposing here is to warn only if something
> > should be fixed in the configuration in order to be prepared for fully
> > hierarchical (and that is a second level of children from root with
> > use_hierachy==0).
> > Does it make more sense now?
> Ah, okay, so what you're saying is that we shouldn't warn if 0
> .use_hierarchys don't make any behavior difference from when they're
> all 1, right?
Exactly. 1st level of children under the root is exactly this kind of
> If so, I have no objection. Will incorporate your updated version.
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/