Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: Consider subtrees in memory.events

[Shakeel Butt]

Hi Tejun,

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 9:07 AM Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hello, Michal.
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 05:50:58PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > Yeah, cgroup.events and .stat files as some of the local stats would
> > > be useful too, so if we don't flip memory.events we'll end up with sth
> > > like cgroup.events.local, memory.events.tree and memory.stats.local,
> > > which is gonna be hilarious.
> >
> > Why cannot we simply have memory.events_tree and be done with it? Sure
> > the file names are not goin to be consistent which is a minus but that
> > ship has already sailed some time ago.
>
> Because the overall cost of shitty interface will be way higher in the
> longer term.  cgroup2 interface is far from perfect but is way better
> than cgroup1 especially for the memory controller.  Why do you think
> that is?
>

I thought you are fine with the separate interface for the hierarchical events.

https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190128161201.GS50184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Is that not the case?

Shakeel