Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 24 Aug 2021 18:44:23 +0200
From:   Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= <mkoutny@suse.com>
To:     brookxu <brookxu.cn@gmail.com>
Cc:     tj@kernel.org, lizefan.x@bytedance.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
        vipinsh@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] misc_cgroup: use a counter to count the number of
 failures
Message-ID: <20210824164423.GA11859@blackbody.suse.cz>
References: <a09f381462b1ce9c506a22713b998e21b459f7e9.1628899295.git.brookxu@tencent.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <a09f381462b1ce9c506a22713b998e21b459f7e9.1628899295.git.brookxu@tencent.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

Hello.

On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 08:15:16AM +0800, brookxu <brookxu.cn@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. If a large number of containers are created and deleted,
>    there will be a lot of error logs.
> 2. According to an error log, we cannot better understand
>    the actual pressure of resources.
> 
> Therefore, perhaps we should use a failcnt counter to count
> the number of failures, so that we can easily understand the
> actual pressure of resources and avoid too many error log..

This is an understandable use case and generally the implementation via
the counter is good as well.

However, the non-hierarchical failcnt interface looks like v1ism to me
(I think new features should come with v2 first in mind).
What about exposing this in misc.events file with max.$res_name entries? 

Or if the hierarchical reporting is unnecessary now, there can be just
misc.events.local for starters.

(That reminds me the forgotten pids.events[.local] rework [1], oops.)

Michal

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191128172612.10259-1-mkoutny@suse.com/#t