On Mon, 10.10.16 14:31, Kevin Wilson (wkev...@gmail.com) wrote: > Hello, systemd developers, > So we have now 3 V2 cgroups controller in the kernel (pids, memory and io). > The CPU controller as of now is not merged in and is available only in > an out of tree git repo (due to some debate over > it with kernel scheduler developers). Not sure that it will be merged > in the next 2 months. > > Fedora 25 is to be released in a month and a half, on 15 of November. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/25/Schedule > My questions are: > what are the intentions regarding using cgroup v2 in systemd in F25 > as the default instead of using cgroup V1? > Is the absence of the CPU controller is a reason for not having > cgroup V2 as a default in F25 ? and if so, why ?
I'd like to switch this over sooner rather than later in Fedora, but I figure we can't do that, unless relevant other upstreams can deal with the new hierarchy too. I figure on Fedora, that'd be at least libvirt and Docker that need to be updated for this. I figure we should start turning this on in Rawhide, and see what breaks, and then revert before the release. Before we can tell Docker/libvirt to port their stuff over I figure we also need one more addition in the systemd API for this: next to Delegate=yes|no (which we already have) we probably need to add DelegateController= taking a list of all controllers to delegate. Right now we delegate all controllers, but I figure that should be configurable, since turning on a controller might have effects people don't expect (in particular for the cpu hierarchy). Either way, we'd also have to post a Fedora feature page for this, to make people aware, I figure. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel