Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] Resource Management - Infrastructure choices

[Paul Menage]

On 10/30/06, Dave McCracken <dmccr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Is there any user demand for heirarchy right now?  I agree that we should
> design the API to allow heirarchy, but unless there is a current need for it
> I think we should not support actually creating heirarchies.  In addition to
> the reduction in code complexity, it will simplify the paradigm presented to
> the users.  I'm a firm believer in not giving users options they will never
> use.

The current CPUsets code supports hierarchies, and I believe that
there are people out there who depend on them (right, PaulJ?) Since
CPUsets are at heart a form of resource controller, it would be nice
to have them use the same resource control infrastructure as other
resource controllers (see the generic container patches that I sent
out as an example of this). So that would be at least one user that
requires a hierarchy.

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