Paul Menage wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2008 2:07 AM, Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> Paul Menage wrote:
>>
>> Hi, Paul,
>>
>> Do we need to use a cgroup.api file? Why not keep up to date documentation and
>> get users to use that. I fear that, cgroup.api will not be kept up-to-date,
>> leading to confusion.
> 
> The cgroup.api file isn't meant to give complete documentation for a
> control file, simply a brief indication of its usage.
> 

But we don't have /proc/proc.api or /sys/sysfs.api ...

> The aim is that most bits of the information reported in cgroup.api
> are auto-generated, so there shouldn't be problems with it getting
> out-of-date.
> 
> Is it just the space used by the documentation string that you're
> objecting to? The other function of the file is to declare a type for
> each variable.
> 

[root@localhost mnt]# cat cgroup.api
debug.current_css_set_refcount  u64
debug.current_css_set   u64
debug.taskcount u64
debug.cgroup_refcount   u64
cgroup.release_agent    string  Path to release agent binary
cgroup.api      unknown Control file descriptions
cgroup.releasable       u64     Is this cgroup able to be freed when empty
cgroup.notify_on_release        u64     Should the release agent trigger when this cgroup is empty
cgroup.tasks    string  Thread ids of threads in this cgroup

It seems to me this is a little messy.

And is it better to describe the debug subsystem too?

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers