Severin Gehwolf
Severin Gehwolf
I'm looking at it. Review should be ready this or early next week.
@jankratochvil The "use hierarchical limit" was a work-around that bites us now. So instead we should attempt to unify cgv1 and cgv2 by walking the hierarchy and find the place...
> After internal discussion I have realized the patch has overgrown its intended scope. And one should also consider how easy it would be for a backport down to JDK-8....
> > One goal of this patch would be to unify how this works for cgroup v1 and cgroup v2. > > That is not much possible anyway as currently...
Thanks for the updates. I like that we have consistency between cgv1 and cgv2 in the latest version in terms of hierarchical limit. What would be even better is to...
> * Will the patch be accepted only for memory or it has to support also CPU? It should be fine for memory only for a start, but we should...
> Should I rebase it on top of the commit [jerboaa@92aaa6f](https://github.com/jerboaa/jdk/commit/92aaa6fd7e3ff8b64de064fecfcd725a157cb5bb) or wait until you finish it? Up to you. I'll keep you posted once the PRs are out.
> Should JDK still support `memory.use_hierarchy == 0`? IMO, no. Just get rid of it and assume hierarchical everywhere. We'd be walking the hierarchy for other (lower limits), which should...
@jankratochvil Please merge master and try to use the new code from https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8331560 to query the limits. Thanks!