lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] Memory usage limit notification addition to memcg
    * Dan Malek <dan@embeddedalley.com> [2009-07-16 11:16:29]:

    >
    > On Jul 16, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Balbir Singh wrote:
    >
    > > Dan, if you are suggesting that we incrementally add features, I
    > > completely agree with you, that way the code is reviewable and
    > > maintainable. As we add features we need to
    >
    > Right, this is all goodness. My specific comments are this patch
    > adds a new useful feature and it's been through a couple of iterations
    > to make it more acceptable. Let's post it, as it makes people aware
    > of such a feature since it's currently in use and useful, and then
    > continue the discussion about how to make it (and all of the cgroup
    > features) better. Otherwise, this is going to degenerate into a "do
    > everything but nothing gets done" ongoing discussion and I'll
    > quickly lose interest and move on the something else :-)
    >
    > There are currently two discussions in progress. One is about
    > notification limits, which this feature patch adds. We need to
    > close this discussion with a more feature rich implementation
    > that addresses both upper and lower notification, the semantics
    > of this feature in a cgroup hierarchy, and in particular the
    > behavior outside of the memory controller group.
    >
    > The second discussion is about event delivery in cgroups.
    > Linux already has many mechanisms, and some product
    > implementations patch even more of their own into the kernel.
    > Outside of these implementation details, we have to determine
    > what is useful for a cgroup. Are events just arbitrary (anything
    > can send any kind of event)? How do we pass information?
    > Is there some standard header? How do we control this so
    > the event target is identified and we prevent event floods?
    > And many more.....
    >

    I think you keep missing my pointers to cgroupstats - a genetlink
    based mechanism for event delivery and request/response applications.


    > > 1. Look at reuse
    > > 2. Make sure the design is sane and will not prohibit further
    > > development.
    >
    > 3. Contain the scope of work so I can do it without affecting
    > the work that pays my salary :-)
    >

    Not at the cost of (1) and (2) and a patient discussion around what is
    being proposed.

    --
    Balbir


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-07-17 04:35    [W:0.084 / U:58.804 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site