On Thu 13-02-20 10:52:49, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 04:47:31PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > Well, I would tend to agree but I can see an existing cgroup hierarchy > > imposed by systemd and that is more about "logical" organization of > > processes based on their purpose than anything resembling resources. > > So what can we do about that to make it all work? > > systemd right now isn't configuring any resource control by default, > so I'm not sure why it is relevant in this discussion. AFAIK systemd already offers knobs to configure resource controls [1]. Besides that we are talking about memcg features which are available only unified hieararchy and that is what systemd is using already. > You gotta > change the layout to configure resource control no matter what and > it's pretty easy to do. systemd folks are planning to integrate higher > level resource control features, so my expectation is that the default > layout is gonna change as it develops. Do you have any pointers to those discussions? I am not really following systemd development. Anyway, I am skeptical that systemd can do anything much more clever than placing cgroups with a resource control under the root cgroup. At least not without some tagging which workloads are somehow related. That being said, I do not really blame systemd here. We are not making their life particularly easy TBH. [1] https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.resource-control.html -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
