Dhaval Giani wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 09:08:04AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 2:09 AM, Dhaval Giani <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>> I am not sure if this is a good idea. For libcgroup, we would then be
>>> adding a special case for just cpuset. I would rather that we allow it
>>> either for all the subsystems or none of them.
>>>
>> libcgroup shouldn't be using the noprefix option. Its only intentded
>> use is to allow the legacy "cpuset" filesystem type to be mounted and
>> to see the same fileset as it had before the cgroups transition.
>>
> 
> It does not. But if some user is using that option, we need to be in a
> position to handle it.
> 
> I am quite happy not supporting the noprefix option in the library if it
> is fine.
> 

I don't think we need to support noprefix in libcgroup.

Even if we decide to support noprefix in the lib, it shouldn't be harder
to handle noprefix+cpuset only than handle noprefix+any combination of
subsystems.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises 
looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the latest 
innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and 
enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization. 
Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
_______________________________________________
Libcg-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libcg-devel

Reply via email to