Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 2/6] Cpusets hooked into containers

[Paul Jackson]

Paul M wrote:
>  It basically makes "cpuset" an alias for "container"
> in the relevant /proc directories if CONFIG_CPUSETS_LEGACY_API is
> defined.

Paul M - I never replied to your initial CONFIG_CPUSETS_LEGACY_API
patch proposal - sorry.

An aspect of this proposal never made sense to me, so I put it aside
and went on to other things.

It is important to me that the current cpuset API be maintained.  The
cpuset API seems to be working well, for a number of users.

Occassionally I will agree to subtle API changes (see another thread
concerning cpu_exclusive and sched_domain cpuset flags), but not
anything likely to break user code outright, except under duress.

But I presume this CONFIG_CPUSETS_LEGACY_API option means I either
get to build a kernel that supports the new container API, or a kernel
that supports the old cpuset API.  That does not seem useful to me.

We need to support both API's, at runtime, at the same time.  Not a choice
of API's at build time with a kernel CONFIG option.

Perhaps I am missing something ...

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> 1.925.600.0401
-
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/