Paul Menage wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Li Zefan wrote:
>> + /*
>> +* Indicate if this subsystem can be bound/unbound to/from a cgroup
>> +* hierarchy which has child cgroups.
>> +*/
>> + unsigned int can_bind:1;
>
> Maybe call this "bindable"?
>
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Matt Helsley wrote:
>> + *
>> + * The iterating order is: a1, a2, b1, c1, c2, a3. So a parent will be
>> + * processed before its children.
>> + */
>
> You could just say it's a depth-first walk except we process the parent before
> its children.
The standard term
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Li Zefan wrote:
> + /*
> + * Indicate if this subsystem can be bound/unbound to/from a cgroup
> + * hierarchy which has child cgroups.
> + */
> + unsigned int can_bind:1;
Maybe call this "bindable"?
Basic idea looks great, it coul
>> +/*
>> + * cgroup_walk_herarchy - iterate through a cgroup hierarchy
>> + * @process_cgroup: callback called on each cgroup in the hierarchy
>> + * @data: will be passed to @process_cgroup
>> + * @top_cgrp: the root cgroup of the hierarchy
>> + *
>> + * For such a hierarchy:
>> + *a1
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 16:09 +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
>> For example, we can't decide a cgroup's cpuset.mems and
>> cpuset.cpus automatically, so cpuset is not bindable.
>
> You mean to say that you cannot add cpuset to an existing hierarchy
> right? Not that you cannot add p
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 04:09:56PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> Stephane posted a patchset to add perf_cgroup subsystem, so perf can
> be used to monitor all threads belonging to a cgroup.
>
> But if you already mounted a cgroup hierarchy but without perf_cgroup
> and the hierarchy has sub-cgroups, yo
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 16:09 +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> For example, we can't decide a cgroup's cpuset.mems and
> cpuset.cpus automatically, so cpuset is not bindable.
You mean to say that you cannot add cpuset to an existing hierarchy
right? Not that you cannot add perf/cpuacct to an existing cpuse
