On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 01:07:53 -0700 "Paul Menage" <menage@google.com> wrote:

> On 6/9/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > - CONTAINER_DEBUG should depend on CONTAINERS
> 
> CONTAINER_DEBUG is actually a container subsystem whose sole purpose
> is to provide debugging information about any hierarchy that it's
> mounted as a part of. So in some senses it's in the same boat as
> something like cpusets or the RSS controller. CONFIG_CONTAINER_DEBUG
> doesn't affect any of the container framework code.

Oh, that's right.

But it still should depend on CONTAINERS

> >
> > - the CPUSETS && SMP is weird and should be deleted, unless I'm missing
> >   something
> 
> Cpusets depends on SMP in the vanilla tree, so that's not anything new
> that I added.

Oh, OK, so CPUSETS is nor a client of CONTAINERS: so it depneds on CONTAINERS

> >
> > - CONTAINERS should depend on CPUSETS
> 
> You mean the other way around?

yup

> >
> > - That leaves CONTAINER_CPUACCT.
> 
> Really, CONTAINER_CPUACCT should have the same relationship to
> CONTAINERS as CPUSETS does.
> 

Would it not be simplest to have CONTAINERS as the top-level
user-configurable item and to then have everything else depend on it?

select is a nasty thing - we repeatedly have problems when using it.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers