From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756379AbZBCQz7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 11:55:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756090AbZBCQzl (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 11:55:41 -0500 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:16513 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756052AbZBCQzj (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 11:55:39 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: x-gmailtapped-by:x-gmailtapped; b=QZV+pXLBladM5P3Vbxs5ovArgVTGwfM+cAeChfJnKLFG9uIX0m4gvjflc8LZ/m5fj RW0t/KoG3U+wZI3v1jvIg== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1233671913.8902.53.camel@abacate.horta> References: <20090202200013.GU3643@vespa.holoscopio.com> <1233606371.15779.32.camel@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr> <20090202205246.GA28593@glandium.org> <20090202214153.GV3643@vespa.holoscopio.com> <20090203102416.GA8886@redhat.com> <87ljsnzo4v.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <1233671913.8902.53.camel@abacate.horta> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:55:34 -0800 Message-ID: <6599ad830902030855h1753f4a4o3a303b4dbddf10de@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: cgroup mount point From: Paul Menage To: Gustavo Noronha Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-GMailtapped-By: 172.24.198.65 X-GMailtapped: menage Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Gustavo Noronha wrote: > On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 23:44 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: >> I agree with all that Thadeu Lima says here. I would add that cgroups >> are nothing to do with device nodes, so definitely don't belong in >> '/dev/' either. >> >> Since they're a filesystem mapping "for browsing and manipulation >> from user space" of a kernel facility, I think '/sys/cgroups/' is >> appropriate. > > I agree with this point of view. I believe /sys/cgroups is the way to > go. Now, of course this has the drawback of shadowing something future > versions of Linux would make available at that same path, but I am > pretty sure they would be careful not to do that after distributions > have settled on a standard path. Having one virtual filesystem mounted on top of another virtual filesystem seems like a recipe for problems. /dev/cgroup or /dev/cgroup/ sounds more reasonable to me (although if anyone is still using devfs that would suffer from the same drawbacks) Paul