Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752649Ab2BVNi5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Feb 2012 08:38:57 -0500 Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([64.131.90.16]:38699 "EHLO mx2.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751338Ab2BVNiy (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Feb 2012 08:38:54 -0500 Message-ID: <4F44EFA6.2000104@parallels.com> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:37:42 +0400 From: Glauber Costa User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20120131 Thunderbird/10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Zijlstra CC: Tejun Heo , Li Zefan , , , Andrew Morton , Kay Sievers , Lennart Poettering , Frederic Weisbecker , , Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFD] cgroup: about multiple hierarchies References: <20120221211938.GE12236@google.com> <1329917459.24994.14.camel@twins> In-Reply-To: <1329917459.24994.14.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1789 Lines: 38 On 02/22/2012 05:30 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 13:19 -0800, Tejun Heo wrote: >> So, I mean, I don't know. What do other people think? Is this a >> unnecessary worry? Are people generally happy with the way things >> are? Lennart, Kay, what do you guys think? > > FWIW I'm all for ripping the orthogonal hierarchy crap out, I hate it > just about as much as you do judging from your write-up. > > Yes it will make some people unhappy, but I can live with that since my > life will be easier.. :-) > > I'm not sure on your process hierarchy pie though, I rather like being > able to assign tasks to cgroups of my making without having to mirror > that in the process hierarchy. > > Having seen what userspace does (libvirt in particular, I've still > managed to not get infected by the systemd crap) its utterly and > completely insane. Now I don't think any of my machines actually still > have libvirt on it, so I don't care if we break that either ;-) > > Another thing I dislike about all the cgroup crap is all the dozens of > tiny controllers being proposed left right and center. Like WTF isn't > the hugetlb controller part of memcg? Its all memory, right? > Right. But this is easy to solve. People are usually pointing out that "Hey, but that's not how my controller works, I need it to be slightly different here and there". If we agree this is a bad thing - I think it is, we can at least adopt as a policy not to take any patches that create another hierarchy unless the need is utterly demonstrated. -- 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/