From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: first step towards hierarchical controller
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:22:04 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FE9FDCC.80000@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120626181209.GR3869@google.com>
On 06/26/2012 10:12 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 05:30:28PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
>> Okay, so after recent discussions, I am proposing the following
>> patch. It won't remove hierarchy, or anything like that. Just default
>> to true in the root cgroup, and print a warning once if you try
>> to set it back to 0.
>>
>> I am not adding it to feature-removal-schedule.txt because I don't
>> view it as a consensus. Rather, changing the default would allow us
>> to give it a time around in the open, and see if people complain
>> and what we can learn about that.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
>> CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
>> CC: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
>> CC: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>> CC: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>
> Just in case it wasn't clear in the other posting.
>
> Nacked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>
> You can't change the default behavior silently. Not in this scale.
>
> Thanks.
>
I certainly don't share your views of the matter here.
I would agree with you if we were changing a fundamental algorithm,
with no way to resort back to a default setup. We are not removing any
functionality whatsoever here.
I would agree with you if we were actually documenting explicitly
that this is an expected default behavior.
But we never made the claim that use_hierarchy would default to 0.
Well, we seldom make claims about default values of any tunables. We
just expect them to be reasonable values, and we seem to agree that this
is, indeed, reasonable.
I personally consider this even better than a mount option. It doesn't
add or remove any new interface, since use_hierarchy was already there.
It doesn't change the behavior of any interface. What would happen for
instance if I rely on a multitude of use_hierarchy = 0 and 1 and
suddenly a mount option would override that?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-26 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-26 13:30 Glauber Costa
2012-06-26 14:11 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-06-26 14:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-26 14:38 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-06-26 14:38 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-26 14:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-26 14:29 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-26 15:31 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-26 15:37 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-06-26 15:27 ` Michal Hocko
2012-06-26 15:28 ` Glauber Costa
2012-06-26 15:50 ` Michal Hocko
2012-06-26 18:12 ` Tejun Heo
2012-06-26 18:22 ` Glauber Costa [this message]
2012-06-26 18:32 ` Tejun Heo
2012-06-26 22:12 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4FE9FDCC.80000@parallels.com \
--to=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox