On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 22:43 -0700, Paul Menage wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Why not provide a interface to add subsystems at run-time instead? > > Are there any reason for not letting a subsystem to be implemented as a > > loadable module? IOW make cgroups usable by modules? > > > > Having all the subsystems declared at compile time makes a lot of > things (number of subsystems, size of css_set, etc) statically known, > which makes the code clearer and more importantly eliminates a bunch > of locking/synchronization overhead. > true > It would be possible to make cgroups support dynamically-loaded > subsystems, and in fact, some of the earliest cgroups patches did > support this, for a predefined max number of subsystems. But it would > introduce more complexity and overhead. > > I'd rather not add support for this without a strong case of a > subsystem that really needs to be dynamically loaded. There were some band-width control patches based on cfq + cgroups, which I guess will mandate cfq to be built-in? Thanks Nikanth Karthikesan _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
