From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755279AbbAGWR1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:17:27 -0500 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:42596 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751995AbbAGWRY (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:17:24 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: Richard Weinberger , Linux API , Linux Containers , Serge Hallyn , "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" , Andy Lutomirski , Tejun Heo , cgroups mailinglist , Ingo Molnar References: <1417744550-6461-9-git-send-email-adityakali@google.com> <548E17CE.8010704@nod.at> <54AB15BD.8020007@nod.at> <87lhlgpyxk.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <54AB2992.6060707@nod.at> <54ACFC38.5070007@nod.at> <87fvbmir9q.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20150107193059.GA1857@mail.hallyn.com> Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:14:40 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20150107193059.GA1857@mail.hallyn.com> (Serge E. Hallyn's message of "Wed, 7 Jan 2015 20:30:59 +0100") Message-ID: <87bnma6xwv.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1/1riHNvoDcGXREeS8fpuppyR750EydYyk= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 97.121.85.189 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 TVD_RCVD_IP Message was received from an IP address * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: No description available. * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.4999] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.5 XM_Body_Dirty_Words Contains a dirty word X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: *;"Serge E. Hallyn" X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Timing: total 194 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.03 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 2.7 (1.4%), b_tie_ro: 2.0 (1.1%), parse: 0.58 (0.3%), extract_message_metadata: 9 (4.6%), get_uri_detail_list: 0.74 (0.4%), tests_pri_-1000: 3.9 (2.0%), tests_pri_-950: 0.98 (0.5%), tests_pri_-900: 0.85 (0.4%), tests_pri_-400: 20 (10.5%), check_bayes: 19 (10.0%), b_tokenize: 5 (2.7%), b_tok_get_all: 7 (3.5%), b_comp_prob: 1.64 (0.8%), b_tok_touch_all: 2.4 (1.2%), b_finish: 0.67 (0.3%), tests_pri_0: 148 (76.2%), tests_pri_500: 5 (2.7%), poll_dns_idle: 0.35 (0.2%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 8/8] cgroup: Add documentation for cgroup namespaces X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 24 Sep 2014 11:00:52 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Serge E. Hallyn" writes: >> By unified hierarchy I mean that every mount of cgroupfs has the >> same directories with the same processes in each directory. > > No, my reading of Documentation/cgroups/unified-hierarchy.txt is that > unified hierarchy means that all (sane) controllers are co-mounted into > one hierarchy. I see what you mean. If it is indeed the case than a mount of cgroupfs using the unified hiearchy and can not specify which controllers are present under that mount that very significant bug and presents a very significant regression in user space flexibility. I think you can still mount the unified hierarchy and select which controls you want to see. If you can not that is a change significantly past what was agreed to and a regression fix needs to be applied. With a unified hierarchy and separate controllers per mount many cgroup using applications will continue to work as before without changes, or with minimal changes. That is what was agreed to and what I expect has been actually implemented and it is what needs to be implemented in any case. I will see about making time to see where things are really at. Eric