[lkml]   [2009]   [Nov]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] Mount point suggestions for cgroup
    On 11/04/2009 05:11 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
    > Quoting Dave Hansen (
    >> On Wed, 2009-11-04 at 13:46 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
    >>> The reason I liked /dev/cgroup was because cpusets could be
    >>> mounted at /dev/cpuset or /dev/cgroup/cpuset. My concern with /cgroup
    >>> is that a ls "/" now becomes larger in size. But I'll take your vote
    >>> for it as +1 for /cgroup.
    >> /dev/pts is a decent precedent for doing it under /dev, although it does
    >> deal with actual devices. cgroups do not.
    > Hmm, on whose behalf are you making this decision?
    > LSB people will want to avoid using /cgroup,

    LSB (and FHS) IMHO does not specify any place for such stuff:

    /dev - for devices only, cgroups are not devices
    /mnt - for admin temporary mounts and "should not affect the manner in
    which any program is run"
    /var - for "any unsorted variable data", cgroups are not "unsorted
    variable data", it's interface to kernel

    FHS does not specify either /sys and /selinux and it seems to me nobody
    complains about them.

    /sys/cgroup would be the best, if sysfs supported mkdir(). But it does
    not :(. Our kernel guys told me it's relatively easy to create new empty
    directory /sys/cgroup (or /sys/kernel/cgroup), but it must be compiled
    into kernel or a module. Then I could mount some tmpfs to it, create
    /sys/cgroup/cpu, /sys/cgroup/memory etc. and mount the control group
    hierarchies there... but as you can see, it's really really ugly thing
    to do.


     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-04 17:27    [W:0.021 / U:53.500 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site