On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 02:15:32 -0700
"Paul Menage" <menage@google.com> wrote:

quoted text
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 2:15 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >> Should we try to support hierarchy and non-hierarchy cgroups in the
> >> same tree? Maybe we should just enforce the restrictions that:
> >>
> >> - the hierarchy mode can't be changed on a cgroup if you have children
> >> or any non-zero usage/limit
> >> - a cgroup inherits its parent's hierarchy mode.
> >>
> > Ah, my patch does it (I think).  explanation is bad.
> >
> > - mem cgroup's mode can be changed against ROOT node which has no children.
> > - a child inherits parent's mode.
> 
> But if it can only be changed for the root cgroup when it has no
> children, than implies that all cgroups must have the same mode. I'm
> suggesting that we allow non-root cgroups to change their mode, as
> long as:
> 
> - they have no children
> 
> - they don't have any limit charged to their parent (which means that
> either they have a zero limit, or they have no parent, or they're not
> in hierarchy mode)
> 
Hmm, I got your point. Your suggestion seems reasonable.
I'll try that logic in the next version.

Thanks,
-Kame

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/