Hey, Vivek. On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 10:03:45AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > With root being treated specially, probably as just being a equal > > group as other groups, I'm not fully determined about that yet. > > So what wrong with flattening the whole hierarchy and all groups being active > in the path? It is not worse then second option? > > root > / | | | \ > G1 G2 G3 G31 G32 It is worse because while there isn't much need for orthogonal hierarchies, people often need to apply different limits at different levels of the hierarchy for different controllers. ie. it often happens that the distinction between G31 and G32 matters for one controller but not for others. The problem with flattening like you suggested above is that it isn't a hierarchy at all - membership isn't recursive. Imposing limits at single level is an additional restriction and may cause some config complexity but it'll be at least explicit and can co-exist with full hierarchy in meaningful way. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cgroups" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
