lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread
    From
    On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 2:06 AM,  <david@lang.hm> wrote:
    >
    > yes, it could mean a doubleing in the number of cgroups that you need on a
    > system. and if there are other features like this you can end up in a
    > geometric explosion in the number of cgroups.

    No, it would be additive - you can mount different subsystems on
    separate hierarchies. So if you had X divisions for memory, Y
    divisions for CPU and Z divisions for suspend-blocking (where Z=2,
    probably?) you could mount three separate hierarchies and have X+Y+Z
    complexity, not X*Y*Z.

    (Not that I have a strong opinion on whether cgroups is an appropriate
    mechanism for solving this problem - just that the problem you forsee
    shouldn't occur in practice).

    Paul


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-08-03 06:43    [W:2.321 / U:0.392 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site