Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1694965

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] cgroup: Child cgroup creation not allowed on invalid domain

From Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] cgroup: Child cgroup creation not allowed on invalid domain
Date 2017-07-24 20:00 +0200
Message-ID <u6POb-8bd-47@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <u5MSl-ZJ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <u5MSl-ZJ-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <u62X8-2z3-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization Red Hat

Show all headers | View raw


On 07/22/2017 09:43 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Waiman.
>
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 04:34:50PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> When thread mode is used, it is possible that some cgroups may be
>> in an invalid state. Currently users may not be aware that they are
>> invalid until they try to migrate tasks over. This patch disallows
>> child cgroup creation on invalid domain. This adds one more failure
>> point in reminding users that they are dealing with invalid domains.
>> It also minimizes the number of invalid domains outstanding as much
>> as possible.
> It's a bit inconsistent because we can reach the same forbidden state
> by turning a sibling cgroup threaded.  Please consider the following.
>
>      A
>     / \
>    B   C
>         \
> 	 D
>
> Let's say all are domains and we make B threaded.  A becomes the
> threaded domain, C and D become invalid, which is the configuration
> you're trying to prevent.  We can either enabling threaded on B too or
> relax type modifications further so that people can make C threaded
> which makes sense given that that would lead to a topology which has
> to supported anyway (if C were threaded before D was created, it'd
> look the same).
>
> So, I'm leaning more towards relaxing restrictions and tightening it,
> and given that we have to expose invalid state anyway, I think there's
> actual benefit in doing so as it gives more flexibility while building
> the hierarchy.

Yes, I totally understand that we could have this happened in a sibling
node. It is just my idea to make users become more aware that they are
dealing with an invalid domain cgroup. It was just a suggestion on my
part and I am totally fine if it is not merged.

Cheers,
Longman

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH v2 1/4] cgroup: Child cgroup creation not allowed on invalid domain Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> - 2017-07-21 22:40 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] cgroup: Child cgroup creation not allowed on  invalid domain Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2017-07-22 15:50 +0200
    [PATCH] cgroup: remove unnecessary empty check when enabling  threaded mode Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2017-07-23 14:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] cgroup: remove unnecessary empty check when enabling  threaded mode Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> - 2017-07-24 21:20 +0200
        [PATCH cgroup/for-4.14] cgroup: add comment to  cgroup_enable_threaded() Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2017-07-25 19:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] cgroup: remove unnecessary empty check when enabling  threaded mode Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2017-07-25 19:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] cgroup: Child cgroup creation not allowed on  invalid domain Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> - 2017-07-24 20:00 +0200

csiph-web