Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] support cgroup pool in v1
From: Greg KH
Date: Fri Sep 10 2021 - 02:01:35 EST
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 10:15:02AM +0800, taoyi.ty wrote:
> On 2021/9/8 下午8:35, Greg KH wrote:
> > I thought cgroup v1 was "obsolete" and not getting new features added to
> > it. What is wrong with just using cgroups 2 instead if you have a
> > problem with the v1 interface?
> There are two reasons for developing based on cgroup v1:
> 1. In the Internet scenario, a large number of services
> are still using cgroup v1, cgroup v2 has not yet been
That does not mean we have to add additional kernel complexity for an
obsolete feature that we are not adding support for anymore. If
anything, this would be a good reason to move those userspace services
to the new api to solve this issue, right?