Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934012AbZGQCdl (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:33:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933990AbZGQCdk (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:33:40 -0400 Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:54972 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933942AbZGQCdj (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:33:39 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 08:03:36 +0530 From: Balbir Singh To: Dan Malek Cc: Linux Containers Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Paul Menage , Andrew Morton , Vladislav Buzov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Memory usage limit notification addition to memcg Message-ID: <20090717023336.GF3576@balbir.in.ibm.com> Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20090708095616.cdfe8c7c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <6599ad830907131515h3c9622b5v309cf8f13d272bab@mail.gmail.com> <20090714100440.6283.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <9B7C6FE2-D946-4286-9537-C4A715997B89@embeddedalley.com> <20090716171530.GC3576@balbir.in.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2447 Lines: 58 * Dan Malek [2009-07-16 11:16:29]: > > On Jul 16, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Balbir Singh wrote: > > > Dan, if you are suggesting that we incrementally add features, I > > completely agree with you, that way the code is reviewable and > > maintainable. As we add features we need to > > Right, this is all goodness. My specific comments are this patch > adds a new useful feature and it's been through a couple of iterations > to make it more acceptable. Let's post it, as it makes people aware > of such a feature since it's currently in use and useful, and then > continue the discussion about how to make it (and all of the cgroup > features) better. Otherwise, this is going to degenerate into a "do > everything but nothing gets done" ongoing discussion and I'll > quickly lose interest and move on the something else :-) > > There are currently two discussions in progress. One is about > notification limits, which this feature patch adds. We need to > close this discussion with a more feature rich implementation > that addresses both upper and lower notification, the semantics > of this feature in a cgroup hierarchy, and in particular the > behavior outside of the memory controller group. > > The second discussion is about event delivery in cgroups. > Linux already has many mechanisms, and some product > implementations patch even more of their own into the kernel. > Outside of these implementation details, we have to determine > what is useful for a cgroup. Are events just arbitrary (anything > can send any kind of event)? How do we pass information? > Is there some standard header? How do we control this so > the event target is identified and we prevent event floods? > And many more..... > I think you keep missing my pointers to cgroupstats - a genetlink based mechanism for event delivery and request/response applications. > > 1. Look at reuse > > 2. Make sure the design is sane and will not prohibit further > > development. > > 3. Contain the scope of work so I can do it without affecting > the work that pays my salary :-) > Not at the cost of (1) and (2) and a patient discussion around what is being proposed. -- Balbir -- 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/