Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758865AbYFDJQF (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2008 05:16:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752079AbYFDJPz (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2008 05:15:55 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:23557 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751930AbYFDJPy (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2008 05:15:54 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to: mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: content-disposition:references; b=AJtlDpWhhrPANLrobAegKbZtE0jt8d9wqND2OXpiVAcliAWUHC1J0tUK1vyc88V7i 0GcxgPt0Ujn0affDnAUOQ== Message-ID: <6599ad830806040215j4f49483bnfa474eb27120a5e3@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 02:15:32 -0700 From: "Paul Menage" To: "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] memcg: hierarchy support (v3) Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , LKML , "balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "xemul@openvz.org" , "yamamoto@valinux.co.jp" In-Reply-To: <20080604181528.f4c94743.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080604135815.498eaf82.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <6599ad830806040159o648392a1l3dbd84d9c765a847@mail.gmail.com> <20080604181528.f4c94743.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1208 Lines: 31 On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 2:15 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >> Should we try to support hierarchy and non-hierarchy cgroups in the >> same tree? Maybe we should just enforce the restrictions that: >> >> - the hierarchy mode can't be changed on a cgroup if you have children >> or any non-zero usage/limit >> - a cgroup inherits its parent's hierarchy mode. >> > Ah, my patch does it (I think). explanation is bad. > > - mem cgroup's mode can be changed against ROOT node which has no children. > - a child inherits parent's mode. But if it can only be changed for the root cgroup when it has no children, than implies that all cgroups must have the same mode. I'm suggesting that we allow non-root cgroups to change their mode, as long as: - they have no children - they don't have any limit charged to their parent (which means that either they have a zero limit, or they have no parent, or they're not in hierarchy mode) Paul -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/