Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756053Ab0KSTMW (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:12:22 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f181.google.com ([209.85.216.181]:58722 "EHLO mail-qy0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754861Ab0KSTMV (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:12:21 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type; b=FfrxQ1Etx3rUp0L4bA6owl6FrM1+WinuEia8y3/+UokWCIEAJibbQvV3hV0siN1LjZ dUMO9wXmsJU3aPv5pj3YD/FRxQKycgtaoyKOlXDsbqsL9Poo7VSNJJFHFlUYKoIkntzO 86+QEGK+xFjPJ+Pm3xExo37Thck0uh6UUQkBY= From: Ben Gamari To: Linus Torvalds , David Miller Cc: mzxreary@0pointer.de, tytso@mit.edu, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, debiandev@gmail.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, dhaval.giani@gmail.com, efault@gmx.de, vgoyal@redhat.com, oleg@redhat.com, markus@trippelsdorf.de, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups In-Reply-To: References: <20101119.082944.226775934.davem@davemloft.net> <20101119163430.GA12353@tango.0pointer.de> <20101119.084302.71115175.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-3-g22aadfc (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.1.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:12:17 -0500 Message-ID: <87mxp53z72.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1239 Lines: 30 On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 09:51:14 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > And the user level approach? I think it's fine too. If you run systemd > for other reasons (or if the gnome people add it to the task launcher > or whatever), doing it there isn't wrong. I personally think it's > somewhat disgusting to have a user-level callback with processes etc > just to clean up a group, but whatever. As long as it's not common, > who cares? > On that note, is there a good reason why the notify_on_release interface works the way it does? Wouldn't it be simpler if the cgroup simply provided a file on which a process (e.g. systemd) could block? I guess it's a little too late at this point considering the old mechanism will still need to be supported, but it seems like this would provide a slightly cheaper cleanup path. Just my (perhaps flawed) two pence. > > So guys, calm down. We don't need to hate each other. > Thanks for the nudge back to sanity. Cheers, - Ben -- 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/