On Mon, 2015-05-04 at 14:37 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 05:11:10PM +0800, Zefan Li wrote: > > > Some degree of flexibility is provided so that you may disable some controllers > > in a subtree. For example: > > > > root ---> child1 > > (cpuset,memory,cpu) (cpuset,memory) > > \ > > \-> child2 > > (cpu) > > Uhm, how does that work? Would a task their effective cgroup be the > first parent that has a controller enabled? > > In particular, in your example, if T were part of child1, would its cpu > controller be root? That's what I'd hope for. I wanted to try that cgroup.subtree_control gizmo to see for myself, but I don't have one, and probably won't get one until I introduce systemd to my axe (again, it's a slow learner). -Mike -- 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
