From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] cgroup: cftype based file interface Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 09:05:32 -0700 Message-ID: <20120319160532.GB11069@google.com> References: <1331940963-15756-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <4F6708F4.4000604@parallels.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Dib/0Ly49Kb9H2anxO0uDMBdr5mGWBRA2CK63a4+/RY=; b=Ku5gkINJ+tZ7Iqox+WbPe4okVLk9eXHpOxrlf6fqSpEou+akFml+8+XJ/nZVHMMsz0 EkvtoC0VTuj/OTrf0Hn55LvWPB08ggEV52sddcQz5Z2gVuLDQVqOzCldHvWg7qiKecCh 1ZPq+bM/EZxk5K0VBDFqn7hANEW38ix7R3q5H8VTln+EfDG/cC4Ke2bgCsQHBMjlxii3 FWwGDlyUw6YNVtnF+hrP5BumVyzu5Iiubb1MvpAA5BXK3FWZiK8BxNjV9uAdxApFGTL4 /UW77aLLjlGbIzfWZ6IeAHHIlX2C+7t/IvzYO4yVIakJpO49Y5ITfDGkWBCn+ebX50xJ dY3Q== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F6708F4.4000604-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Glauber Costa Cc: lizf-BthXqXjhjHXQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org, containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, fweisbec-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, rni-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, ctalbott-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org Hello, Glauber. On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 02:22:44PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > >Glauber, can you please try to move net kmem stuff out of > >->populate(). If ->create() doesn't work for whatever reason, can you > >please explain it to me so that we can find a proper solution? > > The main reason is twofold: > > It first had to do with the order in which registerings take place > at the kernel. But this matter most for the root cgroup. For the > children, it should be all initialized anyway. So we can special > case whatever is needed. I see. > Another point was not to bloat the socket structures with more > function calls, for populate and create. But we can possibly be able > to store some data ourselves, and figure it out. > > How should I do it? Do you want me to provide a patch ontop of your tree ? Yeah, that would be great. Thanks. -- tejun From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030835Ab2CSQFk (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:05:40 -0400 Received: from mail-yx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:37392 "EHLO mail-yx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756018Ab2CSQFi (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:05:38 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 09:05:32 -0700 From: Tejun Heo To: Glauber Costa Cc: lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, rni@google.com, ctalbott@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] cgroup: cftype based file interface Message-ID: <20120319160532.GB11069@google.com> References: <1331940963-15756-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <4F6708F4.4000604@parallels.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F6708F4.4000604@parallels.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Glauber. On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 02:22:44PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > >Glauber, can you please try to move net kmem stuff out of > >->populate(). If ->create() doesn't work for whatever reason, can you > >please explain it to me so that we can find a proper solution? > > The main reason is twofold: > > It first had to do with the order in which registerings take place > at the kernel. But this matter most for the root cgroup. For the > children, it should be all initialized anyway. So we can special > case whatever is needed. I see. > Another point was not to bloat the socket structures with more > function calls, for populate and create. But we can possibly be able > to store some data ourselves, and figure it out. > > How should I do it? Do you want me to provide a patch ontop of your tree ? Yeah, that would be great. Thanks. -- tejun