Li Zefan wrote:
> Add a common function link_css_set() to link a css_set to a
> cgroup.
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I forgot the patch number..The title should be:
[PATCH 2/2] cgroups: add link_css_set() to remove duplicate code
__
Add a common function link_css_set() to link a css_set to a
cgroup.
Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
kernel/cgroup.c | 51 ++-
1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/cgroup.c b/kernel/cgroup.c
index
- Don't link rootnode to the root list, so root_list contains active
hierarchies only as the comment indicates.
- Don't link css_sets to the dummy cgroup, because we never want to
run through the tasks in that dummpy cgroup (which means run
through all the tasks in the system).
Signed-off-b
Hi,
> > > I don't come up with any use case, but I would like to make the
> > > resource controller more flexible. Actually, a certain block device
> > > that I'm using does not use the I/O scheduler.
> >
> > Isn't it equivalent to using No-op? If yes, then it should not be an
> > issue?
>
> No,
On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 02:17 +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 07:45:28PM -0800, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> > Currently task_active_pid_ns is not safe to call after a
> > task becomes a zombie and exit_task_namespaces is called,
> > as nsproxy becomes NULL.
>
> Why do you need
On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 19:45 -0800, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> >From 7f7caaa9d9014d7230dc0b1e0f75536f0b6ccdbf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:12:02 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH 2/5] pid: Generalize task_active_pid_ns
>
> Currently task
On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 11:08 -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > > > What do you think about the solution at IO scheduler level (like BFQ)
> > > > > or
> > > > > may be little above that where one can try some code sharing among IO
> > > > > schedulers?
> > > >
> > > > I would like to support any typ
