On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net> wrote: > On Fri, 29.05.15 00:24, Dimitri John Ledkov (dimitri.j.led...@intel.com) > wrote: > >> On 28 May 2015 at 18:08, Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net> wrote: >> > On Thu, 28.05.15 16:42, Dimitri John Ledkov (dimitri.j.led...@intel.com) >> > wrote: >> > >> >> It appears in /proc/self/cgroup as `0::/' >> > >> > What precisely does this fix? >> > >> > I mean, we need to do some major rework of things before the unified >> > hierarchy is really supported in systemd, and this one thing won't >> > really get us too much in this regard, does it? >> > >> >> I'm starting to explore possibilities to start work towards supporting >> unified cgroups hierarchy, or at least be able to boot with it. I'll >> send a larger patch series in one go later than with all the bits that >> offer something more tangible, albeit disabled by default behind >> configure options (like kdbus) given that unified hierarchy is still >> marked experimental in the kernel. > > Ah, it's actually my big thing to work on for the next weeks too...
What is the advantage of having a unified hierarchy, could you guys explain? Umut > > Lennart > > -- > Lennart Poettering, Red Hat > _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
