Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 6 Nov 2006 13:09:20 -0800 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 2/6] Cpusets hooked into containers |
| |
Paul M wrote: > It basically makes "cpuset" an alias for "container" > in the relevant /proc directories if CONFIG_CPUSETS_LEGACY_API is > defined.
Paul M - I never replied to your initial CONFIG_CPUSETS_LEGACY_API patch proposal - sorry.
An aspect of this proposal never made sense to me, so I put it aside and went on to other things.
It is important to me that the current cpuset API be maintained. The cpuset API seems to be working well, for a number of users.
Occassionally I will agree to subtle API changes (see another thread concerning cpu_exclusive and sched_domain cpuset flags), but not anything likely to break user code outright, except under duress.
But I presume this CONFIG_CPUSETS_LEGACY_API option means I either get to build a kernel that supports the new container API, or a kernel that supports the old cpuset API. That does not seem useful to me.
We need to support both API's, at runtime, at the same time. Not a choice of API's at build time with a kernel CONFIG option.
Perhaps I am missing something ...
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |