On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:15:20PM -0800, Paul Menage wrote: > Hi Dhaval, > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 7:23 AM, Dhaval Giani <dhaval@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > We have been working on a library for control groups which would provide > > simple APIs for programmers to utilize from userspace and make use of > > control groups. > > > > We are still designing the library and the APIs. I've attached the > > design (as of now) to get some feedback from the community whether we > > are heading in the correct direction and what else should be addressed. > > There are a few things that it would be nice to include in such a > library, if you're going to develop one: > > - the ability to create abstract groups of processes, and resource > groups, and have the ability to tie these together arbitrarily. E.g > you might create abstract groups A, B and C, and be able to say that A > and B share memory with each other but not with C, and all three > groups are isolated from each other for CPU. Then libcg would mount > different resource types in different cgroup hierarchies (you would > probably tell it ahead of time which combinations of sharing you would > want, in order that it could minimize the number of mounted > hierarchies). When you tell libcg to move a process into abstract > group A, it would move it into the appropriate resource group in each > hierarchy. > I am not very clear about what you are asking for here, so let me try to rephrase it, and if I have understood it correctly, we can move further ahead from there. So there are two different points, /mem and /cpu. /mem has A and C and /cpu has A, B and C. A and B of /cpu correspond to A of /mem and the C's are the same. With this is mind, if I say a task should move to B in /cpu, it should also move to A in /mem? > - an interface for gathering usage stats from cgroups. > Yes, that is a todo. We should get around to it as the functionality gets implemented in kernel. > - support for dynamically migrating processes between groups based on > process connector events (i.e. a finished version of the daemon that > you were working on last year) > libcg is at a lower level than this. The dynamic migration of processes can be based on top of libcg, and exploit it (and be more powerful than the daemon I posted last year) It would be able to utilize the configuration and other capabilities of libcg. Thanks, -- regards, Dhaval -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
