Paul Menage wrote: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hmm, you mean make them a binary files? > > No, not by default. But I'm working on a plan to have an optional > binary API to cgroups, that would allow multiple control files to be > read in a binary format with a single system call. The existing API > would still be available as well, of course. The idea would be that > monitoring programs that frequently read lots of values from a single > cgroup (or even multiple cgroups) would be able to do so more cheaply > than by making multiple different reads on different files. > > In order for this to work, CGroups needs to know the data type of a > given control file - so this would only be available for the control > files that use typed cgroup output methods rather than the raw file > output interface. Sounds reasonable. >> I thought that filesystem-based >> API should be human readable and writable as much as possible... >> > > Yes, but even without a binary API it makes sense for values that are > likely to be parsed by programs be in a consistent format. > > But after thinking more about this, I think that the devices > permission control file output doesn't really fall under this category > - from a programmatic point of view, I suspect it's write-only, and > only humans will be reading the output, for debugging. Yup. So, if you're fine with the proposed API, I think I will prepare this set and send it to Andrew this week. > Paul > Thanks, Pavel _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers