Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756798AbZAIGdb (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:33:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753111AbZAIGdX (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:33:23 -0500 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:58809 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751743AbZAIGdX (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:33:23 -0500 Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:32:19 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki To: Paul Menage Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "lizf@cn.fujitsu.com" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] NOOP cgroup subsystem Message-Id: <20090109153219.dd8c153d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <6599ad830901082226h6d47053cp801dafb67b6e2bc9@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090109143226.b79d21b4.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <6599ad830901082226h6d47053cp801dafb67b6e2bc9@mail.gmail.com> Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.5.0 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1467 Lines: 35 On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 22:26:46 -0800 Paul Menage wrote: > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:32 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > wrote: > > > > Motivation: Simply classify Applications by cgroup > > When using cgroup for classifying applications, some kind of "control" or > > "account" subsys must be used. For flexible use of cgroup's nature of > > classifying applications, NOOP is useful. It can be used regardless of > > resource accounting unit or name spaces or some controls. > > IOW, NOOP cgroup allows users to tie PIDs with some nickname. > > I agree that the idea is useful. But to me it seems to a bit > artificial that you still have to mount some kind of subsystem purely > to get the grouping, and that you can only have one such grouping. > > I think I'd prefer the ability to mount a cgroups hierarchy without > *any* subsystems (maybe with "-o none"?) which would give you a > similar effect, but without you needing to know about a special no-op > subsystem, and would allow you to have multiple "no-op" groupings. > Oh, it seems better idea. Then, we need no configs and no additional subsys. Thank you for a hint. I'll check how I can do it. Thanks, -Kame -- 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/