------- Comment From preeti.mur...@in.ibm.com 2015-04-20 03:20 EDT------- Hi,
We want cgroups to be mounted *without* the cpuset controller. >From your conversation I could make out the following: 1. LXC does not have a hard requirement on cpusets. But the challenge in not mounting cpusets would be to teach LXC to identify that all controllers may not be mounted when it requests for cgroups. 2. If LXC can identify this, when any container workload asks for cpusets, LXC must fail and ask the user to mount cpusets by himself. 3. But the concern is about workloads that expect cpusets to be mounted implicitly. If this is the case, then this is clearly not the way forward. Is it possible to survey the existing workloads to verify this? Because if there are no such workloads, mounting cgroups without cpusets is the simplest way to address the problem. Another approach is the right one, that being having a cgroup hotplug daemon, which listens on udev events for cpu hotplug operations and update the allowed cpus and mems mask. Such a daemon must be implemented by the service which mounts cgroups, which is systemd in this case ? This will take longer to implement ? Regards Preeti U Murthy -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1392176 Title: mounts cgroups unconditionally which causes undesired effects with cpu hotplug To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cgmanager/+bug/1392176/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
