Paul Menage wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Li Zefan <lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I doubt the value of module-loadable subsystems. A cgroup subsystem >> is usually a kernel resource controller, and normally it needs to >> add some hooks in some in-kernel structures and functions, which >> makes it impossible to be a module. > > Not true - as the classifier example shows, if there's already a > framework that supports hooking loadable modules into some kernel > system, a resource controller can be a module. > True. Just reminds me a pure cfq-based io controller can be a module too, though the io controller discussed in the mini summit won't be a pure cfq-based one. >> In fact, net_cls is the only subsystem that can be a module, and >> make it a module doesn't seem to have real benefit? > > Wouldn't it be just as useful as any other module-loadable classifier, > of which there are quite a few? > > It's true that net_cls is currently the only subsystem that makes > sense to use as a module, but its existence shows that the concept > isn't too outlandish. > Yes, sounds reasonable. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
