Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757070AbZKDQKZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2009 11:10:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756958AbZKDQKZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2009 11:10:25 -0500 Received: from e23smtp06.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.148]:35886 "EHLO e23smtp06.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756905AbZKDQKY (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Nov 2009 11:10:24 -0500 Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 21:39:10 +0530 From: Dhaval Giani To: Balbir Singh Cc: Jan Safranek , Dave Hansen , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Bharata B Rao , libcg-devel , "menage@google.com" Subject: Re: [RFC] Mount point suggestions for cgroup Message-ID: <20091104160910.GN5495@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: Dhaval Giani References: <20091104063005.GC3560@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20091104154024.0b8f6123.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091104081618.GD3560@balbir.in.ibm.com> <1257348117.31972.4360.camel@nimitz> <4AF1A58E.1020003@redhat.com> <20091104160530.GI3560@balbir.in.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091104160530.GI3560@balbir.in.ibm.com> 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: 1217 Lines: 33 On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 09:35:30PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: > * Jan Safranek [2009-11-04 17:02:22]: > > > On 11/04/2009 04:21 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > > >On Wed, 2009-11-04 at 13:46 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: > > >>The reason I liked /dev/cgroup was because cpusets could be > > >>mounted at /dev/cpuset or /dev/cgroup/cpuset. My concern with /cgroup > > >>is that a ls "/" now becomes larger in size. But I'll take your vote > > >>for it as +1 for /cgroup. > > > > > >/dev/pts is a decent precedent for doing it under /dev, although it does > > >deal with actual devices. cgroups do not. > > > > There is also /dev/shm, but IMHO that's not reason to pollute /dev > > with filesystems that are not devices. > > > > Yep, but hasn't the pollution already occured with /dev/cpuset today? > sysfs would require work for changes to /sys, so do we go with Kame's > suggestion of /cgroup? > I vote for /cgroup as well. thanks, -- regards, Dhaval -- 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/