On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 21:41:17 -0700 Paul Menage <menage@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 2:06 AM, <david@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > yes, it could mean a doubleing in the number of cgroups that you need on a > > system. and if there are other features like this you can end up in a > > geometric explosion in the number of cgroups. > > No, it would be additive - you can mount different subsystems on > separate hierarchies. So if you had X divisions for memory, Y > divisions for CPU and Z divisions for suspend-blocking (where Z=2, > probably?) you could mount three separate hierarchies and have X+Y+Z > complexity, not X*Y*Z. > > (Not that I have a strong opinion on whether cgroups is an appropriate > mechanism for solving this problem - just that the problem you forsee > shouldn't occur in practice). > > Paul Ah yes, mea culpa. I've got this wrong. Cheers, Flo _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
