[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:0.099 / U:34.188 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site