From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: brookxu <brookxu.cn@gmail.com>, Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com>,
lizefan.x@bytedance.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] misc_cgroup: introduce misc.events and misc_events.local
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 06:32:41 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YTuIqecqjPKEZcrn@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210910103306.GA24156@blackbody.suse.cz>
Hello,
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:33:06PM +0200, Michal Koutný wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 01:20:37PM +0800, brookxu <brookxu.cn@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yeah, this is more reasonable. But there is still one question, whether we
> > need to be consistent with other cgroup subsystems, events and events.local
> > under v1 should not support hierarchy？
>
> My take is that it's acceptable to present the v2-like files in v1 too
> for the sake of simplicity since:
> - this is not used yet,
> - the v1 is less conventional and
> - the presence of events.local would cater even to cases with tasks in
> inner nodes.
>
> It'd be good to have Tejun's insight on this too.
My general appraoch is
* If it's trivial both in terms of complexity and effort to add support for
cgroup1, oh well, why not?
* Otherwise, don't bother.
* cgroup1 interface is wildly inconsistent anyway, so I wouldn't worry much
about that.
Thanks.
--
tejun
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
To: "Michal Koutný" <mkoutny-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org>
Cc: brookxu <brookxu.cn-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Vipin Sharma <vipinsh-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
lizefan.x-EC8Uxl6Npydl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org,
hannes-druUgvl0LCNAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] misc_cgroup: introduce misc.events and misc_events.local
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 06:32:41 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YTuIqecqjPKEZcrn@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210910103306.GA24156-9OudH3eul5jcvrawFnH+a6VXKuFTiq87@public.gmane.org>
Hello,
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:33:06PM +0200, Michal Koutný wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 01:20:37PM +0800, brookxu <brookxu.cn-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > Yeah, this is more reasonable. But there is still one question, whether we
> > need to be consistent with other cgroup subsystems, events and events.local
> > under v1 should not support hierarchy？
>
> My take is that it's acceptable to present the v2-like files in v1 too
> for the sake of simplicity since:
> - this is not used yet,
> - the v1 is less conventional and
> - the presence of events.local would cater even to cases with tasks in
> inner nodes.
>
> It'd be good to have Tejun's insight on this too.
My general appraoch is
* If it's trivial both in terms of complexity and effort to add support for
cgroup1, oh well, why not?
* Otherwise, don't bother.
* cgroup1 interface is wildly inconsistent anyway, so I wouldn't worry much
about that.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-10 16:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-08 5:24 [RFC PATCH 1/3] misc_cgroup: introduce misc.events and misc_events.local brookxu
2021-09-08 5:24 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] misc_cgroup: introduce misc.failcnt for V1 brookxu
2021-09-08 5:24 ` brookxu
2021-09-09 14:37 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-09 14:37 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-08 5:24 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] misc_cgroup: remove error log to avoid log flood brookxu
2021-09-08 5:24 ` brookxu
2021-09-09 14:37 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-09 14:37 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-09 16:49 ` Vipin Sharma
2021-09-09 16:49 ` Vipin Sharma
2021-09-09 18:56 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-09 18:56 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-10 5:30 ` brookxu
2021-09-10 5:30 ` brookxu
2021-09-10 9:23 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-10 9:23 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-10 14:29 ` brookxu.cn
2021-09-10 14:29 ` brookxu.cn
2021-09-10 15:36 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-10 15:36 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-10 16:29 ` Tejun Heo
2021-09-10 17:16 ` Vipin Sharma
2021-09-10 17:16 ` Vipin Sharma
2021-09-10 17:19 ` Tejun Heo
2021-09-10 17:19 ` Tejun Heo
2021-09-10 17:31 ` Vipin Sharma
2021-09-10 17:37 ` Tejun Heo
2021-09-10 17:37 ` Tejun Heo
2021-09-09 14:37 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] misc_cgroup: introduce misc.events and misc_events.local Michal Koutný
2021-09-09 14:37 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-09 17:08 ` Vipin Sharma
2021-09-09 17:08 ` Vipin Sharma
2021-09-10 5:20 ` brookxu
2021-09-10 5:20 ` brookxu
2021-09-10 10:33 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-10 10:33 ` Michal Koutný
2021-09-10 16:32 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2021-09-10 16:32 ` Tejun Heo
2021-09-09 16:56 ` Vipin Sharma
2021-09-09 16:56 ` Vipin Sharma
2021-09-10 5:21 ` brookxu
2021-09-10 5:21 ` brookxu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YTuIqecqjPKEZcrn@slm.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=brookxu.cn@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan.x@bytedance.com \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=vipinsh@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.