[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: How to draw values for /proc/stat
    On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 12:55 -0200, Glauber Costa wrote:
    > On 12/09/2011 12:03 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

    > > Namespaces seem to be about limiting visibility, cgroups about
    > > controlling resources.
    > >
    > > The two things are hopelessly disjoint atm, but I believe someone was
    > > looking at this mess.
    > I did take a look at this (if anyone else was, I'd like to know so we
    > can share some ideas), but I am not convinced we should do anything to
    > join them anymore. We virtualization people are to the best of my
    > knowledge the only ones doing namespaces. Cgroups, OTOH, got a lot bigger.
    > What I am mostly concerned about now, is how consistent they will be.
    > /proc always being always global indeed does make sense, but my question
    > still stands: if you live in a resource-controlled world, why should you
    > even see resources you will never own ?

    Since without namespaces you can still see the rest of the world. So it
    makes sense to me to still see all resources too.

    Also, proportional controllers might not see a consistent slice of the
    resource, making the stats rather awkward to interpret.

    Furthermore, not everybody might care about these statistics at all and
    I know pjt objected to being subjected to the extra accounting (pjt do
    speak up etc..).

    > If it is not co-mounted, we draw the global value. If you don't mount
    > it, I someone does not mount it, I can assure you he doesn't care about
    > it. We for sure will.

    Anyway, looking at the rest of the emails in this thread the current
    proposal is a cgroup mount option that indicates if you want these
    per-cgroup stats or not, right?

     \ /
      Last update: 2011-12-12 10:37    [W:0.019 / U:19.988 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site