Hello,

On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 11:53:09AM -0800, Matt Roper wrote:
>  * Drivers may be built as modules (and unloaded/reloaded) which is not
>    something cgroup controllers support today.

As discussed in the other subthread, this shouldn't be a concern.

>  * Drivers may wish to provide their own interface to allow userspace to
>    adjust driver-specific settings (e.g., via a driver ioctl rather than
>    via the kernfs filesystem).
>  * A single driver may be managing multiple devices and wish to maintain
>    different driver-specific cgroup data for each.

If you look at io and rdma controllers, they already do this.

> Note that technically these interfaces aren't restricted to drivers
> (other non-driver parts of the kernel could make use of them as well).
> I expect drivers to be the primary consumers of this interface and
> couldn't think of a more appropriate generic name (the term "subsystem"
> would probably be more accurate, but that's already used by cgroup
> controllers).

Let's please not do "driver", it's really confusing.  Just coming up
with a made-up word would be fine as long as the connection can be
made and the word is easily identifiable.  e.g. cgroup cdata / pdata for
cgroup custom / priv data.

> +/*
> + * Driver-specific cgroup data.  Drivers should subclass this structure with
> + * their own fields for data that should be stored alongside individual
> + * cgroups.
> + */
> +struct cgroup_driver_data {
> +     /* Driver this data structure is associated with */
> +     struct cgroup_driver *drv;
> +
> +     /* Node in cgroup's data hashtable */
> +     struct hlist_node cgroupnode;
> +
> +     /* Node in driver's data list; used to cleanup on driver unload */
> +     struct list_head drivernode;
> +};
...
> +struct cgroup_driver {
> +     /* Functions this driver uses to manage its data */
> +     struct cgroup_driver_funcs *funcs;
> +
> +     /*
> +      * List of driver-specific data structures that need to be cleaned up
> +      * if driver is unloaded.
> +      */
> +     struct list_head datalist;
> +};

It generally looks great but can we do something like the following in
terms of interface?

  struct cgroup_cdata {
          const void *key;
          void (*free)(struct cgroup_cdata *cdata);
          /* whatever other necessary fields */
          char data[];
  };

  int cgroup_cdata_install(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct cgroup_cdata *cdata);
  struct cgroup_cdata *cgroup_cdata_lookup(struct cgroup *cgrp, const void 
*key);
  int cgroup_cdata_free(struct cgroup *cgrp, const void *key);
  /* free is also automatically called when the cgroup is released */

And please use a separate lock or mutex for managing them.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Reply via email to