A proposed plan for control groups
After the late-February discussion on the
future of control groups, Tejun Heo has boiled down the comments and
come to some conclusions as to where he
would like to go with this subsystem. The first of these is that multiple
hierarchies are doomed in the long term:
At least to me, nobody seems to have strong enough justification
for orthogonal multiple hierarchies, so, yeah, unless something
else happens, I'm scheduling multiple hierarchy support for the
chopping block. This is a long term thing (think years), so no
need to panic right now and as is life plans may change and fail to
materialize, but I intend to at least move away from it.
So there will, someday, be a single control group hierarchy. It will not, however, be tied to the process tree; it will be an independent tree of groups allowing processes to be combined in arbitrary ways.
The responses to Tejun's conclusions have mostly focused on details (how to
handle controllers that are not fully hierarchical, for example). There
does not appear to be any determined opposition to the idea of removing the
multiple hierarchy feature at some point when it can be done without
breaking systems, so users of control groups should consider the writing to
be on the wall.
| Index entries for this article | |
|---|---|
| Kernel | Control groups |