From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH REPOST RFC cgroup/for-3.7] cgroup: mark subsystems with broken hierarchy support and whine if cgroups are nested for them Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:15:09 -0700 Message-ID: <20120914191509.GN17747@google.com> References: <20120910223125.GC7677@google.com> <20120910223355.GD7677@google.com> <20120911100433.GC8058@dhcp22.suse.cz> <5050568B.9090601@parallels.com> <20120912154907.GW21579@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20120912171120.GP7677@google.com> <20120913121438.GC8055@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20120913171832.GY7677@google.com> <20120913173958.GA21381@dhcp22.suse.cz> <5052E87A.1050405@parallels.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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=0RK/M/xiN39xOrI96uyVfL8GcVehot2cqNJzUfCWcfg=; b=c22zzq+A6wwHJXC/c72Ra5WtbErrIZ6ai1/+XuaS5NgBO8AAlyC3WdWQiaOPJFcNUa re/UFMjHfxyclDGii8uGjahJVHY4wMntt/KSq3xmMgjvO2tQrIkaNa+kY3bTq2AMGUnn n7MTr61chQTYpOkIcOIof0vCxyiafvhvGWjecw+io2Oj4HzRwERvh5Kg/QjxT4jYRRRs CUwQj/ZQlZlkUcff8mWLOPEmb3uxOyim9pA3JMItveANlRIMNwzmzkmbGBrhMmUorQBg 4RRZu/QRxR8fuQXEFoOdrmqVzv/wfFyiW4p7opyXvNZouLKys3XhuPgwA7KULsp84mbs TV4Q== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5052E87A.1050405-bzQdu9zFT3WakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Glauber Costa Cc: Neil Horman , "Serge E. Hallyn" , containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Michal Hocko , Paul Mackerras , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Johannes Weiner , Thomas Graf , cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Paul Turner , Ingo Molnar , Vivek Goyal On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:19:06PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > I want oppose it as well, but I believe part of this exercise is to make > the need to have hierarchy widespread. Warning on the case > 1st-level-only case helps with that, even if we make more noise than we > should. > > The reason I supported Tejun's proposal originally, is that I think that > if we make the wrong amount of noise, being wrong by a surplus is better > than being wrong by a deficit, in this case. I think both are valid points and don't think it makes a lot of difference either way. Michal being the maintainer of the code, I'm taking his approach for this one. 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 S932337Ab2INTPR (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:15:17 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:37235 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754093Ab2INTPO (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Sep 2012 15:15:14 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 12:15:09 -0700 From: Tejun Heo To: Glauber Costa Cc: Michal Hocko , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Li Zefan , Peter Zijlstra , Paul Turner , Johannes Weiner , Thomas Graf , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Vivek Goyal , Paul Mackerras , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Neil Horman , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [PATCH REPOST RFC cgroup/for-3.7] cgroup: mark subsystems with broken hierarchy support and whine if cgroups are nested for them Message-ID: <20120914191509.GN17747@google.com> References: <20120910223125.GC7677@google.com> <20120910223355.GD7677@google.com> <20120911100433.GC8058@dhcp22.suse.cz> <5050568B.9090601@parallels.com> <20120912154907.GW21579@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20120912171120.GP7677@google.com> <20120913121438.GC8055@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20120913171832.GY7677@google.com> <20120913173958.GA21381@dhcp22.suse.cz> <5052E87A.1050405@parallels.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5052E87A.1050405@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 On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:19:06PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > I want oppose it as well, but I believe part of this exercise is to make > the need to have hierarchy widespread. Warning on the case > 1st-level-only case helps with that, even if we make more noise than we > should. > > The reason I supported Tejun's proposal originally, is that I think that > if we make the wrong amount of noise, being wrong by a surplus is better > than being wrong by a deficit, in this case. I think both are valid points and don't think it makes a lot of difference either way. Michal being the maintainer of the code, I'm taking his approach for this one. Thanks. -- tejun