[Devel] Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/10] taskstats: Enhancements for precise accounting
* Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org [2010-09-27 13:02:56]: Good point. It is not really necessary. I started development using the netlink code. Therefore I first added the new command in the netlink code. I also thought, it would be a good idea to provide all netlink commands over the procfs interface to be consistent. Maybe we should have delivered taskstats over procfs from day one. The intention was to provide taskstats over a scalable backend to deal with a large amount of data, including exit notifications. We provided some information like blkioi delay data on proc, but not the whole structure. -- Three Cheers, Balbir ___ Containers mailing list contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers ___ Devel mailing list Devel@openvz.org https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Devel] Re: [PATCH 0/3][V2] remove the ns_cgroup
On 09/27/2010 10:46 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 15:36:58 -0500 Serge E. Hallynserge.hal...@canonical.com wrote: This patchset removes the ns_cgroup by adding a new flag to the cgroup and the cgroupfs mount option. It enables the copy of the parent cgroup when a child cgroup is created. We can then safely remove the ns_cgroup as this flag brings a compatibility. We have now to manually create and add the task to a cgroup, which is consistent with the cgroup framework. So this is a non-backward-compatible userspace-visible change? Yes, it is. Patch 1 is needed to let lxc and libvirt both control containers with same cgroup setup. Patch 3 however isn't *necessary* for that. Daniel, what do you think about holding off on patch 3? One way of handling this would be to merge patches 12 which add the new interface and also arrange for usage of the old interface(s) to emit a printk, telling people that they're using a feature which is scheduled for removal. Right, that makes sense. Do you will take the patches #1 and #2, drop the patch #3, and I send a new patch with the printk warning ? Or shall I resend all ? Thanks -- Daniel ___ Containers mailing list contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers ___ Devel mailing list Devel@openvz.org https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[Devel] Re: [PATCH 0/3][V2] remove the ns_cgroup
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:50:17 +0200 Daniel Lezcano daniel.lezc...@free.fr wrote: On 09/27/2010 10:46 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 15:36:58 -0500 Serge E. Hallynserge.hal...@canonical.com wrote: This patchset removes the ns_cgroup by adding a new flag to the cgroup and the cgroupfs mount option. It enables the copy of the parent cgroup when a child cgroup is created. We can then safely remove the ns_cgroup as this flag brings a compatibility. We have now to manually create and add the task to a cgroup, which is consistent with the cgroup framework. So this is a non-backward-compatible userspace-visible change? Yes, it is. Patch 1 is needed to let lxc and libvirt both control containers with same cgroup setup. Patch 3 however isn't *necessary* for that. Daniel, what do you think about holding off on patch 3? One way of handling this would be to merge patches 12 which add the new interface and also arrange for usage of the old interface(s) to emit a printk, telling people that they're using a feature which is scheduled for removal. Right, that makes sense. Do you will take the patches #1 and #2, drop the patch #3, and I send a new patch with the printk warning ? Or shall I resend all ? I dropped #3. Please send the printk-warning patch. I'd suggest a printk_once(), nice and verbose. ___ Containers mailing list contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers ___ Devel mailing list Devel@openvz.org https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
