Re: cgroup: status-quo and userland efforts

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Quoting Tejun Heo (tj@xxxxxxxxxx):
> Hello, Serge.
> 
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 01:14:57PM -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > I should find a good, up-to-date summary of the current behaviors of
> > each controller so I can talk more intelligently about it.  (I'll
> > start by looking at the kernel Documentation/cgroups, but don't
> > feel too confident that they'll be uptodate :)
> 
> Heh, it's hopelessly outdated.  Sorry about that.  I'll get around to
> updating it eventually.  Right now everything is in flux.
> 
> > Right,  I'm not attached to my toy implementation at all - except for
> > the ability, in some fashion, to have nested agents which don't have
> > cgroupfs access but talk to another agent to get the job done.
> 
> I think it probably would be better to allow organization and RO

What do you mean by "organization"?  Creating cgroups and moving tasks
between them, without setting other cgroup values?

> access to knobs and stat files inside containers, for lower overhead,
> if nothing else, and have comm channel for operations which need
> supervision at a wider level.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> tejun
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers




[Index of Archives]     [Cgroups]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux