| 1 |
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann |
| 2 |
<volkerarmin@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> On Monday 27 December 2010 19:37:29 Mark David Dumlao wrote: |
| 5 |
> > I want to do this: |
| 6 |
> > http://blog.internetnews.com/skerner/2010/11/forget-200-lines-red-hat-speed. |
| 7 |
> > html |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > in userspace, but automate it at boot time. it requires that I create and |
| 10 |
> > mount the cgroup subsystem in sysfs and sounds a lot like something that I'd |
| 11 |
> > do in sysctl for /proc/sys, but for sysfs rather than procfs. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > The only thing that comes to mind is to append to the local init script, but |
| 14 |
> > it's so close to what sysctl does that I feel like someone's probably |
| 15 |
> > written some tool for it. Is there one? |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> why? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> why not just patch the kernel? or wait for 2.6.37? Why trying the easily |
| 20 |
> broken userspace approach? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I disagree. I think userspace is the best place to do this, not |
| 23 |
kernelspace, especially as I'm considering customizing the cgroup |
| 24 |
behavior further than that. I'm not sure why I'd call the userspace |
| 25 |
approach broken. It's different, not broken. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> btw - patch or userspace - what happens with apps not started from a shell? |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
Well according to the wiki article posted uses shell, and it doesn't |
| 31 |
affect non-shell behavior. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
This email is: [ ] actionable [ ] fyi [x] social |
| 35 |
Response needed: [ ] yes [x] up to you [ ] no |
| 36 |
Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate [ ] soon [x] none |
Archives