On 11-Sep 08:18, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Patrick. Hi Tejun,
> Can we first concentrate on getting in the non-cgroup part first? That's the reason why I've reordered (as per your request) the series to have all the core and non-cgroup related bits at the beginning. There are a couple of patches at the end of this series which can be anticipated but, apart from those, the cgroup code is very well self-contained within patches 7-12. > The feature has to make sense without cgroup too Indeed, this is what I worked on since you pointed out in v1 that there must be a meaningful non-cgroup API and that's what we have since v2. > and I think it'd be a lot easier to discuss cgroup details once the > scheduler core side is settled. IMHO, developing the cgroup interface on top of the core bits is quite important to ensure that we have effective data structures and implementation which can satisfy both worlds. My question is: IF the scheduler maintainers are going to be happy with the overall design for the core bits, are you happy to start the review of the cgroups bits before the core ones are (eventually) merged? Cheers, Patrick -- #include <best/regards.h> Patrick Bellasi
