Hello, On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 01:09:23PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > On 07/20/2018 12:37 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:19:29PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > >> I am not against the idea of making it hierarchical eventually. I am > >> just hoping to get thing going by merging the patchset in its current > >> form and then we can make it hierarchical in a followup patch. > > Where's the rush? Why can't we do this right in one go? > > For me, the rush comes from RHEL8 as it is a goal to have a fully > functioning cgroup v2 in that release. > > I also believe that most of the use cases of partition can be satisfied > with partitions at the first level children. Getting hierarchical > partition right may drag on for half a year, maybe, giving our history > with cpu v2 controller. No matter what we do to enable hierarchical > partition in the future, the current model of using a partition flag is > intuitive enough that it won't be changed at least for the first level > children. I'm fully with Waiman here. There are people wanting to use it and the part most people isn't controversial at all. I don't see what'd be gained by further delaying the whole thing. If the first level partition thing isn't acceptable to everyone, we can even strip down further. We can get .cpus and .mems merged first, which is what most people want anyway. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
