From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751615AbdGRSrW (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2017 14:47:22 -0400 Received: from mail-qt0-f195.google.com ([209.85.216.195]:35431 "EHLO mail-qt0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751532AbdGRSrS (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2017 14:47:18 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 14:47:14 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: lizefan@huawei.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mingo@redhat.com, longman@redhat.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, pjt@google.com, luto@amacapital.net, efault@gmx.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, guro@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] cgroup: implement cgroup v2 thread support Message-ID: <20170718184714.GA3365493@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> References: <20170717020721.3612468-1-tj@kernel.org> <20170717020721.3612468-6-tj@kernel.org> <20170717141409.sqafufjupsiffnri@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20170717142609.GC3519177@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20170718172801.f56273tzgzn3xkne@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20170718175456.GH585283@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20170718184135.auf6d2clsdxseka3@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170718184135.auf6d2clsdxseka3@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 08:41:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 01:54:56PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > > > Okay, we're kinda off the rails now. Just to verify that we're on the > > same page, are you also saying that the following should be a valid > > configuration? > > > > R (D) > > | > > A (D and has processes in it and controllers enabled) > > | > > C (D and has processes in it) > > > > Argh, the no internal process thing again -- I completely forgot about > that :-( Heh, yeah, we wouldn't be talking about all these otherwise. The restriction is pain in the ass but at the same time useful for full(er)-scope resource control. Were there other things that caught your eyes? Thanks. -- tejun