| Re: How to draw values for /proc/stat [message #44400 is a reply to message #44383] |
Tue, 06 December 2011 00:05   |
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Messages: 463
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 5 Dec 2011 07:32:33 -0200
Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Specially Peter and Paul, but all the others:
>
> As you can see in https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/12/4/178, and in my answer
> to that, there is a question - one I've asked before but without that
> much of an audience - of whether /proc files read from process living on
> cgroups should display global or per-cgroup resources.
>
> In the past, I was arguing for a knob to control that, but I recently
> started to believe that a knob here will only overcomplicate matters:
> if you live in a cgroup, you should display only the resources you can
> possibly use. Global is for whoever is in the main cgroup.
>
Hm. I have a suggestion and a concern.
(A suggestion)
How about having a mount option for procfs ?
For example,
mount -t proc .... -o cgroup_virtualized
Then, /proc/stat etc shows per-cgroup information.
(A concern)
/proc/stat will be a mixture of virtualized values and not-virtualized values.
1. Don't users need to know whether each value is virtualized or not ?
2. Can we have a way to show "this value is virtualized!" annotation ?
> Now, it comes two questions:
> 1) Do you agree with that, for files like /proc/stat ? I think the most
> important part is to be consistent inside the system, regardless of what
> is done
>
I think some kind of care for users are required as I wrote above.
> 2) Will cpuacct stay? I think if it does, that becomes almost mandatory
> (at least the bind mount idea is pretty much over here), because drawing
> value for /proc/stat becomes quite complex.
> The cpuacct cgroup can provide user, sys, etc values. But we also have:
>
If virtualized /proc/stat works, I don't think 'account only' cgroup is
necessary. It can be obsolete.
Thanks,
-Kame
|
|
|
|
OpenVZ Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
