On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:48 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki<kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hmm, do we need to this "info" file as subsys ? How about making this as > default file set ? (if there are users.) > That would certainly be possible, and would be an alternative to having multi-bindable subsystem support. The advantage of adding multi-bindable subsystems is that you can avoid bloating the core cgroups code, by putting individual small cgroups features in their own code modules, and you get to decide at mount time which features are actually mounted; if they were part of the core cgroups files, then there would either need to be special mount options for each separate feature, or else no way to pick which features were mounted on each hierarchy. Paul _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
