Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 14 Sep 2012 11:53:24 -0700 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] cgroup TODOs |
| |
Hello, Vivek.
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 02:07:54PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > I am curious that why are you planning to provide capability of controller > specific view of hierarchy. To me it sounds pretty close to having > separate hierarchies per controller. Just that it is a little more > restricted configuration.
I think it's a lot less crazy and gives us a way to bind a resource to a set of controller cgroups regardless which task is looking at it, which is something we're sorely missing now.
> IOW, who is is the user of this functionality and who is asking for it. > Can we go all out where all controllers have only one hierarchy view.
I think the issue is that controllers inherently have overhead and behavior alterations depending on the tree organization. At least from the usage I see from google which uses nested cgroups extensively, at least that level of flexibility seems necessary.
In addition, for some resources, granularity beyond certain point simply doesn't work. Per-service granularity might make sense for cpu but applying it by default would be silly for blkio.
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |