Re: [RFC] Mount point suggestions for cgroup

[Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 09:35:30PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> * Jan Safranek <jsafrane@redhat.com> [2009-11-04 17:02:22]:
> 
> > On 11/04/2009 04:21 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > >On Wed, 2009-11-04 at 13:46 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > >>The reason I liked /dev/cgroup was because cpusets could be
> > >>mounted at /dev/cpuset or /dev/cgroup/cpuset. My concern with /cgroup
> > >>is that a ls "/" now becomes larger in size. But I'll take your vote
> > >>for it as +1 for /cgroup.
> > >
> > >/dev/pts is a decent precedent for doing it under /dev, although it does
> > >deal with actual devices.  cgroups do not.
> > 
> > There is also /dev/shm, but IMHO that's not reason to pollute /dev
> > with filesystems that are not devices.
> >
> 
> Yep, but hasn't the pollution already occured with /dev/cpuset today? 
> sysfs would require work for changes to /sys, so do we go with Kame's
> suggestion of /cgroup?
> 

I vote for /cgroup as well.

thanks,
-- 
regards,
Dhaval