Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:01:12 -0800 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [RFD] cgroup: about multiple hierarchies |
| |
Hey, Peter.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 02:30:59PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > FWIW I'm all for ripping the orthogonal hierarchy crap out, I hate it > just about as much as you do judging from your write-up.
I just don't get why it's there. Maybe, there can be some remote use cases where orthogonal hierarchies can be useful but structuring whole cgroup around that seems really extreme.
> I'm not sure on your process hierarchy pie though, I rather like being > able to assign tasks to cgroups of my making without having to mirror > that in the process hierarchy.
The only question is whether we want to allow cgroup hierarchy to be completely orthogonal from process tree structure, which I don't think is a good idea. It shouldn't affect trivial use cases. If not explicitly configured, all tasks would live in a single root cgroup - much like every process would belong to the same session if nobody does setsid() since boot (or container).
I don't know how the implementation would turn out and it may as well stay separate as it is now but I still think the topology should match pstree.
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |